Untitled1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Final Generic', Environmental
Impact Statement
M.
1
For
Great Escape Theme Park LLC
June 2001
Volume 2 of 3 Public Hearing Record and Written
Comments
e
11
1
Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement
For
The Great Escape Theme Park, LLC
Proposed Expansion
US Route 9
Town of Queensbury
Warren County, New York
Lead Agency:
Town of Queensbury Planning Board
Town Center, 742 Bay Road
Queensbury, New York 12804
Contact: Craig MacEwan, Chairman
(518) 761-8220
Prepared by:
The LA Group
Landscape Architecture and Engineering, P.C.
40 Long Alley
Saratoga Springs, New York 12866
' Contact: S. Jeffrey Anthony and Dean R. Long
(518) 587-8100
Lemery MacKrell Greisler LLC
Attorneys at Law
10 Railroad Place
LSaratoga Springs, New York 12866
Contact: John C. Lemery, Esq. and
Jack R. Lebowitz, Esq.
' (518) 581-8800
Creighton Manning Engineering, LLP
4 Automation Lane
Albany, New York 12205-1683
Contact: Shelly Johnston
(518) 446-0396
ENSR
6601 Kirkville Road
East Syracuse, New York 13057
' Contact: Scott Manchester
1-800-950-0506
I
FGEIS for Great Escape Theme Park
Pelton Marsh Kinsella
_ 1420 W. Mockingbird Lane, Suite 400
Dallas, Texas 75247
Contact: Dan Hester
(214) 688-7444
Richard R. Leinbach
21 Olena Drive
Whitesboro, New York 13492
Contact: Richard Leinbach
(315) 736-1323
Clough Harbour and Associates
3 Winners Circle
Albany, New York 12205
Contact: Steve Nissan
(518) 453-4500
Ryan Biggs Associates, P.C.
291 River Street
Troy, New York 12180
Contact: Mark Kanonik
(518) 272-6266
Hartgen Archeological Consultants
27 Jordan Road
Troy, New York 12180
Contact: Karen Hartgen/Matthew Kirk
(518) 283-0534
Date of Acceptance of DGEIS: July 28, 2000
Date of Public Hearing: August 29, 2000
Close of Comment Period: October 27, 2000
Date of Acceptance of FEIS: June 21, 2001
FGEIS for Great Escape Theme Park
1
ITABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...................................................................................... 1-1
SECTION 2 SUMMARY COMMENTS AND RESPONSES
2.1 Summary Comments and Responses.........................................................................................2-1
2.2 Index by Commenter.............................................................................................................. 2-668
2.3 Index by Topic....................................................................................................................... 2-672
SECTION 3 PUBLIC HEARING TRANSCRIPT AND WRITTEN COMMENTS 3-1
3.1 Transcript...................................................................................................................................3-2
3.2 Index to Transcript................................................................................................................... 3-56
3.3 Written Comments................................................................................................................... 3-79
SECTION 4 EXHIBITS AND APPENDICES
4.1
2000 Sound Studies
4.2
Locations of Profiles, and Profiles
'
Figure
4-2 Location Map for Figures 4-2A thru 4-2E
4-2A Line of Sight Profiles
4-213 Courthouse Estates Profile — Existing and Proposed (vert 1" = 300')
4-2C Courthouse Estates Profile — Existing and Proposed (vert I" = 100')
4-213 South Side Profile — Existing and Proposed (vert I" = 300')
4-2E South Side Profile — Existing and Proposed (vert 1" = 100')
4-3 Section Location Map for Figures
4-3A Sections 1 and 2
t
4-3B Sections 3 and 4
4-3C Sections 5 and 6
4.3
Visual Analysis 2000 — 2001
4.4
Tap Structure
4.5
Water Quality Data Charts
4.6
Revised level of Service Reports
4.7
Price Study of Study Area Neighborhood Property Value Changes
4.8
DGEIS Notices of Completion
State Environmental Quality Review: Notice of Completion
of Draft Generic -EIS and Notice of SEQR Hearing
NYS Department of Environmental Conservation:
Environmental Notice Bulletin, August 9, 2000
The Post -Star article: Town of Queensbury Planning Board
Notice of Completion of Draft Generic Environmental Impact
Statement and Notice of Public Hearing
1
t4.9 Great Escape HydroCAD Data Files
4.10
Figure 4.10, Shuttle Bus Route
'
4.11
NYSDEC Visual Impact Program Policy Statement
4.12
NYSDEC Noise Impact Program Policy Statement
4.13
Distance to Residential Uses Map
4.14
Stormwater Report (Summary)
SECTION5 ERRATA....................................................................................................................5-1
1
11
1
1
1
1
SECTION 3.1
TRANSCRIPT
1
r�
1
1
H
Public Heari
Condenselt"'
Page 1
1
QUEENSBURY PLANNING BOARD
2
3 PUBLIC NEARING
4
RE: DGEIS FOR THE GREAT ESCAPE
5
6 Queensbury Nigh School
Aviation Road
7 Queensbury, Nev York
8 Tuesday, August 29, 2000
7:00 P.M.
9
BEFORE: CRAIG MacENAN, Chairman
10 Mr. John Strough, Member
Ms. Catherine LaBombard, Member
11 Mr. Robert Vollaro, Member
Mr. Larry Ringer, Member
12 Mr. Anthony Metiver, Member
13 NARK SCRACNNER, ESQ.
biller, riannlx i Pratt, P.C.
li One Broad Street Plaza
P.O. Box 765
15 Glens Falls, Nev York 12801
16 Mr. Chris Round
Executive Director of
17 community Development
19 Jack R. Lebowitz, Esq.
John C. Lemery, Esq.
19 Lemary MacKrell Greisler, LLC
30 Railroad Place
20 Saratoga Springs, Ne•. York 12866
21 Members of the Public
22
23
Page 2
1 MR. ROUND: Can everyone hear the
2 Chairman? Louder. Can you hear me all
3 right? Evidently you can. My name is
4 Chris Round. I am Director of Community
5 Development for the Town of Queensbury.
6 We have Mark Schachner as town counsel,
7 and Stu Messinger for Chazen Companies,
8 consultant, hired to review the EIS for
9 the town. Tonight's meeting is to
10 receive public comment. It is not a
i i dialogue. It is not a question and
12 answer period between the applicant and
13 the public. It is your opportunity to
14 provide comments on the Environmental
15 Impact Statement. • The Impact Statement
16 was accepted as complete the beginning
17 of the month. Public notices were filed
18 as required in the Environmental Notice
19 Bulletin, legal notices were placed in
20 The Post -Star. You may have seen
21 advertisements in our local media. The
22 applicant will, we will keep a written
23 record of all public comment received
24 tonight. You can also provide written
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
August 29, 2000
Page 3
comment. They will weigh equally as
well as oral comment. Those comment
will be summarized and will be included
in the proposed FEIS, the Final
Environmental Impact Statement. The
applicant will prepare responses to
those comment. The Town Planning Board
as lead agency will make judgments about
those responses and will either ask for
revisions provided our judgment. It is
the Town's Environmental Impact
Statement so it has to be the Town's
satisfaction, in this case, the Planning
Board's. If there is anything else, the
close of public comment is September
12th. I believe that is Tuesday. You
could receive written comment right up
to the end of business, 4:30 on that
day. Turn it back over to the Planning
Board's Chairman.
I did forget. There is no smoking
in the auditorium. There are emergency
escapes, exit at the rear, in the front
of the auditorium. If you have any
Page 4
other questions about the process, right
now we answered those questions about
the process, and then we will let the
applicant make a presentation.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Chris.
Our procedure tonight we are going to
let the applicant make a ten minute
presentation and open up the floor and
calling individuals that wish to address
the planning that we did on a first
come, first serve basis. We will call
you by number. We ask you to use this,
please, a podium over here clearly and
directly because we are recording it in
two different forms, and if you have
written presentation that you want to
make part of your presentation, we ask
you to leave it with staff before you
leave here tonight. With that, we will
get underway.
MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. Is this on?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Switch is right in
front.
3-2
Nublic
1
1
1
1
15
16
17
18
19
21
22
23
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
i
.earkng
CondenseIt`"`
August 29, 2000
Page 5
Page 7
MR. COLLINS: Thank you. Good
1
watch the same movie over and over
evening, everybody, Planning Board
2
again. Same thing with theme park goes,
members, interested members of the
3
but you need to have something. That is
community. My name is John Collins, I
4
what we are trying to the generic set
am the vice president and general
5
threshold attractions and approvals and
manager here at the'Great Escape, and I
6
address the major impacts ahead of time.
am going to talk to you a little bit
7
The overall purpose of the project is
about our project, and then our Draft
8
obviously to grow attendance at the park
Generic Environmental Impact Statement
9
while reducing or mitigating any
as you Planning Board requested, I will
10
environmental impact, whether they be
try to keep this short, but I also want
i I
from present levels or from anticipated
to go through as much as I can so that
12
levels.
people understand what went into the
13
1 am going to show a quick slide
project as well as what went into the
14
here of the pedestrian bridge. This is
EIS.
15
actually the bike bridge that goes
What the Great Escape is proposing
16
across Quaker Road. It is a very
is the expansion of visitors support
17
standard type of bridge. There is
facilities, including a pedestrian
18
located or will locate, we will locate a
bridge over Route 9, new parking lots
19
pedestrian bridge and/or underpass. We
with an integrated ring road, a 200-room
20
are still looking at the engineering of
hotel just north of our existing Coach
21
both our southern most crosswalk. You
House Restaurant, which the restaurant
22
are going to find a pedestrian bridge or
will remain. We are proposing to
23
underpass will do more to alleviate
replace our existing septic systems with
24
traffic than the ring roads we are
Page 6
Page 8
the new state of the art tertiary waste
I
proposing,
water treatment plant.
2
The next picture we are going to
Now we are doing this even in spite
3
show is the proposed ring roads and
of the fact that we spent over a quarter
4
parking lot layout. There is colored
million dollars the past several years
5
photos of this out in the lobby area, if
in upgrading those systems, including a
6
you didn't get a chance to see. This
brand new waste water septic system, if
7
has a little more detail but I have got
you will, at The Coach House Restaurant,
8
a laser pointer here. This is Martha's
which was just completed this year. We
9
right there. This is the Samoset over
are also going to upgrade the electrical
10
there. And we are proposing to keep The
systems within the parks so that -we will
I I
Coach House, to keep Martha's, to add
have the electrical capacity so the park
12
the hotel approximately right there.
can grow. And then we are going to set
13
And then create a parking lot and with a
some guidelines, hopefully guidelines
14
ring road so that we can get people off
that we can all agree to where we can
15
the roads and thus alleviate traffic
add and change attractions so the park
16
congestion.
can grow.
17
The purpose of our Draft Generic
Attractions are the life blood of
18
Environment Impact Study is both the
the theme park. We are in an
19
Planning Board and this Great Escape
entertainment venue that always is
20
realize that our ultimate goal is not
striving to add something new for its
21
simply to build parking lots and other
guests. People don't go to watch the
22
support facilities but to grow our
same movie over and over. You do have
23
business and thus the number of visitors
your hard core movie watcher that might
24
to the park. That is why we have
3-3
Public Hearing CondenseIt' August 29, 2000
Page 9
Page 11
1
reviewed the cumulative and indirect
1
We have put a lot of people to work
2
impact that our growth has on the
2
on this job. We had a full meeting in
3
environment. We have taken a hard look
3
June of last year where people were
4
at what SEQRA requires when we drafted
4
concerned about what we were doing with
5
the Draft Generic Environmental Impact
5
the land we just bought. While we are
6
Statement that is before you tonight.
6
coming to you today saying we are doing
7
To understand what we have done in
7
exactly what that land, what the land
8
preparing this EIS, it -will be very
8
what we said we were, we are going to
9
helpful to get familiar with the areas
9
put parking in, proposing a potential
10
that we are talking about in the study.
10
hotel in this location, but there is lot
11
We are talking about three distinct
11
of people that worked very hard on since
12
areas. One we are we are calling Park
12
that meeting, and I would like to
13
Area C, which is the green area. Now
13
introduce who has worked on this
14
that area is all the property that's on
14
project. The LA Group has been the
15
the west side of Route 9 up to I-87.
15
primary consultant, impact consultant,
16
The Samoset would be at the north end of
16
and we have Jeff Anthony and Dean Long
17
that picture, and where that project
17
from the LA Group. These people are
18
area the red any with the arrow, that
18
answering questions and will answer
19
would be the zoo property, the former
19
questions if you have any after or down
20
Lake George Zoo property that we have
20
the road. From Creighton and Manning,
21
now as well.
21
we have Shelly Johnston did our traffic
22
Park Area B, which is land we own
22
study. From Hartgen Archeological
23
but is undevelopable, it is the Rush
23
Associates consultant we have Matthew
24
Pond, I believe is the name of it,
24
Kirk and Walter Wheeler. They did all
Page 10
Page 12
1
wetlands area. We just want to show you
1
our archeological work. We have got
2
that we have that land over there, and
2
Dick Leinbach who studied our electrical
3
Park Area A is where the existing park
3
needs and proposed the mitigation
4
is and where all the attractions will be
4
factors and additions to that interest
5
added, or, you know, replacements of
5
from Delaware Engineering we have Bill
6
attractions will occur. Now the
6
Bright who worked on the wastewater
7
majority of that is wetlands or the Glen
7
treatment, the wastewater issue and also
8
Lake fen. So some of that I think is
8
proposed the treatment building. We
9
roughly 257 acres. We have
9
have Scott Manchester from ENSR who
10
approximately 100 acres that we will use
10
worked on sound and audible, the noise
11
and have been developing to the.park.
11
issue, and it's Mark Kanonik from Ryan
12
Okay.
12
and Biggs. His firm designed the
13
Some of the potential impacts that.
13
pedestrian bridge and worked on that.
14
we have studied or we have tried to do
14
We also have our legal retention,
15
to the best of our ability is to assess
15
which is John Lemery and Jack Lebowitz,
16
all the direct and indirect and
16
who have coordinated the whole effort.
17
cumulative impact .of the park expansion
17
These people put a lot of hard work
18
on things such as surf or surface and
18
on this project. It has been a year
19
groundwater quality, visual impacts,
19
long project. I think if and you have
20
traffic, audible noise, archeological
20
to read the document there is a lot of
21
and historical resources, tertiary and
21
information, a lot of technical data
22
equatic equal storm water management,
22
that if you have any questions we will
23
land use and zoning, public service and
23
be here to help answer those.
24
then economic and fiscal impacts.
24
Have I got a couple quick minutes?
3-4
11
I
Public
CondenseIt'
Page 13
9, 2000
Page
1
MS. LaBOMBARD: You have one
1
MR. CHAIRMAN: May be what we can
2
minute.
2
do to help is move things, call three
3
MR. COLLINS: I can't go through
3
people at a time come up here and have a
4
all the mitigation factors that are in
4
seat in front.
5
the document, but a couple things I
5
MS. LaBOMBARD: Roger Boor is next
6
really want to quickly point out. We
6
and third is Joanne Bramley.
7
have heard the concerns. We worked very
7
SPEAKER: Good evening. Before I
8
hard on addressing issues that have come
8
start, I want to get everybody on the
9
up. Our sound study is going to reveal
9
same page because I am doing a survey of
10
that attendance doesn't have anything to
10
a sound study for this EIS. Sound is
I
do with noise. We have isolated the
I
measured by decibels.
12
noise to one specific attraction which
12
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Sipp, can I get
13
we believe we all know about which is
13
you to speak nice and clearly in the
14
the Bobsled. We have spent over
14
microphone?
15
S100,000 to try to mitigate that this
15
THE WITNESS: Sound is measured by
16
year and ongoing process. We thought we
16
the decibels and the decibel is not
17
had it with softer wheels and in
17
lineate bar logarithmic to a sound and
18
combination with the phone we put on,
18
increases in decibels makes a big change
19
but operationally we could not allow it
19
in the sound. To give you an idea of
20
to run. It changed it too much. So we
20
what decibels are, a whisper is 20
21
had to go back to the drawing board. So
21
decibels. A normal living room is 40.
22
that's an issue that we are going to
22
A vacuum cleaner though is 80. A
23
work on but I hope it shows that we
23
semi -tractor trailer at ten feet is 100.
24
didn't have to do this, but we heard
24
And a chainsaw may be as high as 110.
Page 14
Page 16
1
what was being said, obviously, and we
1
So that sound increases rather
2
are trying to do the things to mitigate
2
dramatically as the number of decibels
3
either existing problems or potential
3
increase.
4
problems.
4
But the ear does not perceive
5
But we are going to run through
5
loudness in this way. And therefore, a
6
some of the benefits of the park
6
three percent increase in decibel, in
7
expansion. We have over 5.2 million
7
decibel sound is only barely perceptible
8
dollars in payroll and we look to double
8
even though it is a doubling of the
9
that by 2004. We have approximately
9
amount of sound. But at five decibels
10
1,400 seasonal employees and we expect
10
you get quite a noticeable difference.
11
that to almost double as well.
11
At ten it is a dramatic difference and
12
Is that it? Okay. Please read
12
the ear perceives it. And this is an
13
that section. It is very important.
13
important part, the ear perceives this
14
And thank you for your time.
14
as twice as loud.
15
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you,
15
For tonight's presentation I would
16
Mr. Collins.
16
like to call this the five ten room.
17
We will start calling your names as
17
Five decibels is quite noticeable. Ten
18
you signed in tonight. We ask you when
18
is a dramatic increase in the amount of
19
you come up to the podium, identify
19
sound. To begin with, let me start with
20
yourself for the record and give us your
20
a method of sampling. Samples were
i
21
address, if you would. Turn it right
21-
taken in four places. Three which were
22
over to.Mrs. LaBombard.
22
done in 1990 and another one was added
23
MS. LaBOMBARD: Don Sipp from
23
this year which would be on the west
24
Courthouse Drive in Lake George.
24
side of Route 9. The three that were
t
— . — . _ _ ft+ol CZ AC AG9A
D....e 12 - D.,.,e 1%
3-5
Pubhe
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Condenselt "-'
Page 17
taken in 1990 were at Glen Lake
Courthouse Estates and Twicwood. The
problem is in Glen Lake sampling was
taken behind a hill, and admittedly in
this EIS it says that the sound is
mitigated by this reading being taken
behind the hill. The others are in the
line of sight. That is, if there were
no trees in the way you could see the
source of the sound. But at Glen Lake
you can see it. Why were not these
sounds at Glen Lake taken in a line of
sight much as they were in Twicwood and
Courthouse?
You all had received or picked up
on the way in, I think, a little fact
sheet. I call your attention to the
noise section which says, "No
significant impact in audible noise."
If we go back to the 1990 studies and
compare them with 1999, we find that
there is a difference in Courthouse of
8.2 decibels. In Twicwood 5.7.
Remember the five ten rule five being a
1 this in the summary of this report from
2 PMK it says the Courthouse because of
3 the Bobsled Courthouse suffers a 9.1
4 decibel increase over the background
5 noise. Twicwood suffers a 12.2 above a
6 background noise.
7 Again apply the five ten rule, five
8 being noticeable, ten being dramatic.
9 Here we are talking 9 and 12 increase
10 due to the Bobsled. Mitigation
II measures, obviously, as Mr. Collins
12 says, they didn't work so we are still
13 suffering with this noise. On this fact
14 sheet we find that they say that all of
15 the residential neighbors are within
16 federal guidelines. Up there they had
17 them in quotation marks. In here they
18 do not. There are no federal
19 guidelines. There is no federal
20 regulatory system for noise and yet they
21 choose to use this. If they choose to
22 use federal guidelines, let's get one
23 more recent one than the 1980 one they
24 are using. This comes from the Code of
9, 2000
Page 19
Page 18
Page 20
1
noticeable increase, ten being a
1
Federal Registers Title 21, Part 1, part
2
dramatic increase. There are readings
2
0 to 188. Section 51103 says the
3
in here which are taken to show that the
3
exterior noise levels it is HUD's goal
4
ambient noise level is not that much
4
that the exterior noise level should not
5
different. And if you take some on the
5
exceed a day night average of 55
6
August 29th reading, we find that there
6
decibels. It goes on to say in interior
7
is no footnote to show that although the
7
noise levels HUD has the goal that
8
park is open, the Bobsled is not
8
interior auditory environment shall not
9
operating. Therefore, these numbers are
9
exceed a day night average of 45. But
10
less.
10
again none of these are regulatory
11
On the same chart we find a reading
11
agencies. They are just as they are in
12
which is supposed to be what is the
12
quotation marks, guidelines.
13
level of noise when the park is closed
13
The conclusions reached by the EIs
14
on November 12th, in which it gives the
14
on page 3-44 while occasionally
15
reading of 55 decibels where the actual
15
detectable from the two neighbors there
16
reading from the field data is now at 41
16
is no difference in the noise level and
17
decibels. A little different. A
17
why all the telephone calls to the Great
18
significant difference shall we say.
18
Escape complaining about the noise.
19
12.5 decibels. Remember the five ten
19
Noise is not related to the attendance,
20
rule.- 12 decibels is a lot of
20
and may not be related to the
21
difference. If you go through the
21
attendance, but it has been related to
22
document you will find the study done by
22
the additional rides needed to use this
23
PNK, a noise specialist, in order to
23
additional attendance.
24
determine the effect of the Bobsled. In
24
Inclusion number 3, the ambient
3-6
I
11
Public
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
I3
14
16
17
18
19
fearing CondenseIt1m August 29, 2000
Page 21
Page 23
noise levels have not changed. Again we
1
issues. It is not about economics.
were not told that on October 29th when
2
MS. LasOMBARD: Excuse me. Your
they were measuring ambient noise levels
3
ten minutes is up.
that the Bobsled was not running. In a
4
SPEAKER: Therefore, I submit that
letter from ENSR on 10/14/99 regarding
5
the economic issues should be brought
the sound measurements taken it states
6
into this, and I believe that anybody
that Courthouse the roller coaster sound
7
who can say that the environmental
was six to 11 decibels above the
8
issues in this thing will have no impact
existing sound levels and Twicwood was
9
is a laughable statement. Even The
four. Again, apply the five ten rule.
10
Post -Star lampooned it with their
Six to 11 decibels above the background
11
editorial cartoon.
noise caused by the Bobsled.
12
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Sipp.
On October 6th there was a table
13
MS. LaBOMBARD: Thank you very
showing that on October 6th they
14
much.
determined the day night noise levels
15
(Applause.)
was October 6th was a Thursday. Was the
16
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Boor, what we
park open and running on that date?
17
think we will do so the speakers are
They plan on removing 11.4 acres of
18
aware what is going when we get to one
trees and five point acres of lawn.
19
minute mark we will let you --
Will this additional 16.9 additional
20
SPEAKER: My name is Roger Boor,
lanes of blacktop keep the sounds from
21
for those of you that don't know.
the Northway at present levels? Have
22
Although voluminous in raw data this
sound barriers ever been considered if
23
study for the most part relies on the
they will not put back trees that they
24
unstudied, unsubstantiated assertions
Page 22
Page 24
are removing?
1
and grossest of omissions. It is more
Removal of the hillside from the
2
an attempt to deceive than to enlighten
Samoset to The Coach House Restaurant.
3
and many of the conclusions have little
There is untold cubic yard of spoils
4
to do with the reality of what is being
which will be removed and be replaced by
5
proposed on the effects of the local
parking lot and ring road. Is there
6
public.
data or is there a computer model which
7
The Great Escape, formally Story
will show that there will be no increase
8
Town, serves as a prime example of how
in sound from the Northway in the
9
recreational habits and their subsequent
Twicwood and Courthouse Estates
10
impact can change over time. The theme
neighbors. There is removal of --:
11
park, Story Town did not have the degree
vegetation from Animal Land and Martha's
12
of negative impacts to the community
Hotel. Some 40 to 60 foot trees will be
13
that the current ride park now has. The
removed. Is there data to show that
14
Queensbury Planning Board experienced
there is no increase in sound from the
15
and I hope learned a valuable lesson
Northway and the Twicwood neighbor?
16
when it innocently omitted or failed to
They will say that trees do not
17
secure a limit on the extended hours at
effectively block sound. On top of that
18
the park. Extending the hours of
knoll, that esker where the Samoset sits
19
operation should be a notice to all of
and from there on down to The Coach
20
you that in fact the facility known as .
House Restaurant there are 40 to 60 foot
21
the Great Escape may in the future
trees besides the amount of fill that is
22
change again as a result of the changes
to be removed.
23
to something other than just a ride park
This EIS is about environmental
24
or a giant ride park. Let's be sure not
3-7
n A
ruouc xieanng
Uondenseit""
August 29, 2000
Page 25
Page 27
1
overlook all the uses of properties with
1
Traffic counts for cars exiting from the
2
current zoning, realizing that say large
2
north onto the bridge and cars using the
3
festivals or concerts or other uses may
3
bridge to go south on I-87 are
4
eventually become popular. In this
4
conspicuously absent from all the
5
study the applicant states that patrons
5
traffic counts shown in figures 3.1 to
6
leave over a long period of time so
6
3.30. They are instead left in appendix
7
there will be no negative traffic
7
A of this manifest and disjoined from
8
impacts created by exiting vehicles,
8
their interpretation and enlightening.
9
yet, they are seeking festival parking.
9
The cornerstone of this traffic
10
Did the traffic study look at festival
10
study is that you do not look at the
i i
situations or special events where all
11
bridge traffic and the opposing left
12
patrons exit at once? The answer is no.
12
hand turns to access or exit I-87. This
13
This one assumption alone, the
13
cornerstone, the two lane bridge, fails
14
assumption that exiting patrons will
14
by the shear weight of even the most
15
always leave the park over a long period
15
cursory of glances. In this study and
16
of time deserves very serious scrutiny
16
in reality the Gurney Lane bridge and
17
by this board. What will occur when
17
intersection with Route 9 is but a house
18
30,000 patrons at the Great Escape
18
of cards. As you read this document you
19
experience one of the afternoon
19
will see that the name Gurney Lane is
20
thunderstorms or prolonged down pours
20
conspicuously absent from almost all
21
that start say mid afternoon?
21
commentary and analysis. Can a
22
Volume 2, Traffic Impact, page 6
22
professional traffic engineering firm
23
states: During approximately 230 days
23
make assertions about traffic in the
24
of the year, the Great Escape generates
24
area without looking at the Gurney Lane
Page 26
Page 28
1
essentially no traffic and during
1
bridge, its intersection with Route 9
2
approximately 250 days of the year, the
2
and its ultimate level of service
3
Great Escape is closed during the a.m.
3
capabilities?
4
peak hour.
4
Is a two lane bridge going to be
5
Concentrating the 1.5 million
5
able to handle the future demands of our
6
visiting patrons into 136 days is hardly
6
growing community and also provide safe
7
a comfort to me, or anyone else that has
7
and timely egress and ingress to the
8
to travel by or near the park during
8
Great Escape? Of the three ways to
9
peak season.
9
access Interstate 87 in the Town of
10
Page 7 of the study, the last
10
Queensbury are we asking too much of the
11
bullet states: Approximately 80 percent
11
two lane structure?
12
of the peak hour traffic entering the
12
Page 27, traffic impact on local
13
Great Escape parking lots approach from
13
collector roads states: Tourists will
14
the north and approximately 20 percent
14
not use local collector roads to access
15
approach from the. south. The
15
the park because they will not know
16
ambiguities of this statement are
16
about them and the local collector roads
17
obvious, of the 80 percent entering the
17
would generally not provide direct and
18
park from the north, what percentage in
18
easy access to their destinations when
19
fact is coming from the south exiting
19
they leave the park. This statement
20
I-87 at exit 20 and backtracking to the
20
begs the question: What are the
21
park? Current stacking problems on
21
destinations of people leaving the park?
22
northbound 87 would seem to verify that
22
It goes on to say the increased traffic
23
perhaps points south are in fact a
23
on local collector roads such as Glen
24
larger source of trip generation.
24
Lake Road, West Mountain Road, Round
3-8
d
1
11
Public Hearing Condenseltr` August 29, 2000
Page 29
Page 31
1 Pond Road and Sweet Road will be
1 pedestrian and bicycle traffic across
2 negligible. And local mobility, except
2 the bridge going to be insured?
3 for the Route 9 corridor, will not be
3 Given that: The U.S. Census
4 affected by the Great Escape expansion.
4 predicted a 22 percent growth in
5 The capabilities of local collector
5 population for Queensbury over the ten
6 roads are adequate to accommodate the
6 year period from 1990 to 2000. Given
7 vehicular demands of local circulation.
7 that through June of this year building
8 The last sentence states: As a result
8 permits are on record pace. Given that
9 there will be no impact on local
9 the towns use a conservative two percent
10 collector roads in the area. I would
10 rate of traffic increase per, year as a
11 ask, isn't Gurney Lane a local collector
11 standard. Given that Warren and
12 road?
12 Washington Counties show the lowest
13 How did the preparers of this
13 rates of unemployment in the entire
14 document determine that people using the
14 state. Given all this and more, how can
15 park don't know about local collector
15 the applicant state that the
16 roads? I would assume the park
16 capabilities of local collector roads
17 encourages and experiences repeat
17 are adequate to accommodate the
18 customers. Where are the 2,300 Great
18 vehicular demands of local circulation?
19 Escape employees going to go when not at
19 I would pose this question to this
20 work? Will they all stay on site
20 board: Are you taking home more
21 throughout the season?
21 paperwork now than you did last year or
22 How did the applicant determine
22 the year before that? Do you believe
23 that the increase in traffic on
23 that the collector roads will be able to
24 collector roads would be negligible?
24 handle the traffic adequately if the
Page 30
Page 32
1 This in light of the statement page 75
1 growth stays at its current pace?
2 under conclusions, second to the last
2 Where in this report is there any
3 sentence that states: Trip generation
3 kind of detailed study of the local
4 during the afternoon peak hour of
4 traffic on collector roads other than
5 adjacent street traffic is less than the
5 counts? Have large senior housing
6 morning peak hour trips and therefore,
6 facilities and multiple dwelling
7 was not analyzed at all study locations.
7 projects currently underway east of the
8 Here again lies much ambiguity, I have
8 Great Escape been accounted for with
9 to believe that people go to work also
9 regard to their access to Interstate 87
10 return home. Who determined what
10 and the Route 9 corridor, and what about
11 locations would be studied which would
11 pending developments that are likely to
12 be ignored? Isn't it reasonable to
12 receive approval? Has the applicant
13 assume that the morning commuters
I3 addressed the real growth rate of the
14 familiar with the traffic snarls created
14 area and the associated traffic
15 by the morning arrivals to Great Escape;
15 implications?
16 commuters who did not use the local
16 In that the applicant has suggested
17 collector roads on the way to work might
17 building an on -site sewage treatment
18 indeed use them on their way home?
18 plant or hooking up to the line provided
19 Apparently the study did not include
19 by the town, I pose these questions.
20 this use of collector roads by local
20 Has sewering in an area ever hurt or
21 residents. Again are we to believe that
21 lessened the development of an area?
22 Gurney Lane will not experience greater
22 Has sewering ever caused population to
23 numbers of cars as a direct result of
23 decrease? Has sewering an area ever
24 the proposed expansion? How is safe
24 hurt business startups or discouraged
3-9
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Public Hearing CondenseItTm
August 29 2000
Page 33
Page 35
1
upgrades and expansion of existing
1
adequately the negative impacts that
2
businesses?
2
locals who must travel the roads in and
3
In reality wouldn't sewering any
3
around the Great Escape will experience.
4
area of the town promote development and
4
Simply adding an additional turning lane
5
its associated traffic? Where has the
5
into the park and optimizing lights is
6
applicant addressed these scenarios?
6
not going to produce any long term or
7
Although the pedestrian walkway
7
short term solution to the massive
8
will provide a safer and more convenient
8
growth this area of our town is
9
way to enter the park, how will the
9
experiencing. The infrastructure simply
10
effect of allowing Route 9 northbound
10
does not exist. I see nothing in the
I
traffic to more quickly reach the
11
draft document that comes close to
12
troublesome bottleneck at 9N, Glen Lake
12
addressing the changes that would have
13
Road intersection and the Gurney Lane
13
to take place.
14
Route 9 intersection, how will this be
14
In closing, I would like to say
15
addressed? Will traffic be stacked
15
that the proposed new lane from
16
between the Glen Lake Road light, Gurney
16
northbound I-87 through Route 9 Gurney
17
Lane light and exit 20 light to the
17
Lane intersection has a high probability
18
point where westbound travelers of Glen
18
of creating a worse situation than
19
Lake Road will be unable to turn right
19
already exists. It will reduce the
20
regardless of a green light?
20
stacking capabilities of Gurney Lane
21
Why was the nameless road that
21
bridge, it will create another lane
22
currently circumnavigates the Warren
22
change for big rigs and automobiles
23
County Municipal Center not recognized
23
heading south on Route 9 from 149 and
24
as a legitimate legal means used by many
24
attempting to use the bridge for points
Page 34
Page 36
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
23
23
24
locals, to avoid the traffic of exiting
patrons at the Great Escape? As one of
the four legs that make up the Gurney
Lane/9N intersection and also the
headquarters for the Warren County
Sheriffs office, shouldn't at least some
consideration be given to this used and
viable route? How will Warren County
officials feel about increased use of 15
mile per hour road? Will everything
that is being proposed by the applicant
create situations where emergency
vehicles may not be able to respond in a
timely fashion and necessary way?
Will improvements to the 149
corridor lessen or cause greater numbers
of cars and trucks to enter the study
area and well-known bottleneck at exit
and entrance ramps that make up the
entire exit 20 interchanges?
The applicant abbreviated solutions
to all the traffic problems in the study
area boils down to mostly on site
changes and that does not address
1
south on Interstate 87, and require more
2
time for all vehicles that either turn
3
from or to the bridge from Route 9,
4
thereby increasing the likelihood that
5
cars entering on a yellow or God forbid
6
red light may in fact be trapped and
7
thus impede the flow of cars that now
8
have a green light. Thank you very
9
much.
10
(Applause.)
11
MR. CHAIRMAN: In the interest of
12
getting through this process tonight, I
13
realize that this is very emotionally
14
charged evening for most everyone,
15
refrain from the applause or the boos
16
and hisses, whatever the case may be
17
applied so that we can continue on
18
because there are 46 speakers who want
19
to talk. We certainly want to give
20
everyone an opportunity to speak.
21
SPEAKER: Good evening. Page 2,
22
volume one of Great Escape's DGEIS
23
states, and I quote, "In order to
24
protect its already considerable
3-10
1
I
Public Hearing
CondenseIt'
August 29, 2000
Page 37
Page 39
1
investment Great Escape is prepared to
1
to ascend 40 stories in seven seconds at
2
expend 15 to 20 million dollars over the
2
100 miles an hour. A lot more is
3
next few years on additional rides and
3
involved in these parks than people
4
attractions. Therefore in order to
4.
imagine. The technology is quite
5
remain competitive Great Escape must
5
state-of-the-art. When it comes to
6
continually be added to and improve upon
6
thrills, too much is never enough," end
7
the attractions within the park." The
7
quote.
8
purpose of the project is outlined in
8
From the moment you enter the park,
9
Section 1.1 is to provide the
9
designers are directing your natural
10
infrastructure necessary to support the
10
psychological and physical reactions to
11
anticipated growth and park attendance
11
draw you to a ride. The distinctive
12
that is likely to result from Great
12
roar of the Six Flags Magic Mountain
13
Escape's continued investment in new
13
Superman ride is heard throughout the
14
rides and attractions. There is no
14
park. The 40 story ride is designed to
15
request for specific right of approval
15
be big and loud and grab your attention.
16
contained in this study. However, in as
16
Jim Blackie of Magic Mountain says, and
17
much as the applicant addresses the need
17
I quote, "You can't miss it.
18
to become competitive I will direct my
18
Irregardless of where you would -have
19
initial comments to outlining what will
19
placed it, you would have seen it," end
20
be involved in the park for the
20
quote. Another strategy used to attract
21
community.
21
riders is to extend a portion of the
22
Amusement park trend and that of
22
track over walkways.
23
Great Escape specifically is update the
23
With 80 percent of Americans being
24
parks what is referred in the industry
24
within three hours of a major ride park,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
19
iv
'
Page 38
as extreme ride or scream machines. The
following information was provided by
Discovery.com and entitled "Screen
Ride," excuse me, "Extreme Ride 2000,"
as well as from the documentary
amusement parks the pursuit of fund Six
Flags Magic Mountain in the Goliath,
it is the tallest, fastest continuous
roller coaster in the western world
reaching 255 feet high and runs 85 miles
an hour. Designed by the Swiss firm
Intimin, its president states, "The
limits are almost endless because we
just started with the linear induction
motors five years ago and there is a
long way to go. I am looking forward to
working with the park to pass the
hundred mile mark."
Also at Six Flags Magic Mountain is
the ride Superman the Escape. Jim
Blackie, vice president of facilities
management says, and I quote, "The most
difficult element of the ride was the
power system, getting a 12,000 pound car
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
3-11
21
22
23
24
Page 40
the Great Escape must follow other parks
by installing these new rides or risk
the threat of losing the patrons to
neighboring parks. S&S Power, another
thrill ride manufacturer has just
launched Air Thrust 2000, billed as the
thrill ride of the new millennium. Park
World Magazine describes the ride as one
that initially catapults riders
horizontally from zero to 1.5 seconds.
At -the -Park Magazine says, and I quote,
"It is very fast and you feel the skin
is going to rip off your face. It's
very intense," end quote.
As amazing as prototype is, it's
nothing compared to what S&S has in
store for the full-scale model. They
hope to double its height to 350 feet,
add more hills, twists and turns and
break a coaster speed record.
At -the -Park Magazine publisher states,
"The millennium is forcing a lot of
people to want to knock your socks off.
There is a lot of record breakers coming
Pubhc Heanng Condenselt—
August 29, 2000
Page 41
Page 43
1
out in the next couple of years," end
1
feet. How can this study refer to this
2
quote. I would like to know how the
2
as negligible visual impact for this
3
ride compare to the Alpine Bobsled noise
3
community? How can this be deemed a
4
as noise generators. We have really no
4
relatively small element? The few
5
indication that the new rides will be
5
locations it is visible from as shown on
6
any better. The mitigation mentioned in
6
the map is 90 percent Glen Lake, various
7
this study for the Bobsled has proved to
7
areas of the Glens Falls Country Club,
8
be ineffective and the ride has been
8
the bike path, and the north and
9
generating the same level of noise. How
9
southbound lanes of the Route 9 and
10
is this going to be addressed? Can
10
1-87. I would like to see the applicant
i i
decibel readings for the new scream
11
quantify the number of affected persons
12
machine rides be provided so the
12
for each receptor area. This will
13
Planning Board is aware of the magnitude
13
undoubtedly put a different perspective
14
of the intended development of these
14
on the use of the word few. Why was no
15
rides at this park? Is the park going
15
data included regarding the construction
16
to address the noise emitted by patrons
16
of noise barriers as possible
17
screaming? Is this a visual scene that
17
mitigation?
18
we want to create for our community?
18
The Great Escape's conclusion on
19
All visitors in this area are not park
19
visual effects is not one that instills
20
enthusiasts. Many residents and
20
confidence in the public that our
21
tourists appreciate the present
21
concerns are being addressed. The
22
topography.
22
Planning Board must project what this
23
Page 4-24 of volume one states, and
23
park has the potential to become in 20
24
I quote, "A 200 foot tall structure was
24
years. The ten years ago the Planning
Page 42
Page 44
1
selected for analysis since that height
1
Board did not project what the
2
is required for a modern roller coaster
2
consequences would be when the owners
3
to reach speeds of 60 miles an hour,
3
sought approval for the Comet. The park
4
which is the current design standard for
4
changed from a children's theme park to
5
most significant coasters," end quote.
5
a nighttime ride park and has proceeded
6
As documented above, the current trends
6
in that direction every since. Expanded
7
far exceeds this standard.
7
hours were addressed by the neighbors
8
Page 4 and 5 of the Executive
8
ten years ago and we were told by the
9
Summary discusses the simulated views of
9
owners that no change was planned. We
10
a 200 foot structure to create a
10
all know that because restrictions were
i i
benchmark for visual impact, quote,
11
not included in the resolution for that
12
"This visual simulation documents that
12
ride the park was free to extend its
13
such a high structure would have a
13
hours. There is no mention of hours of .
14
negligible visual impact because of the
14
operation in this study. Why is that
15
limited areas of view and the visual
15
not included?
16
context, which would make such a
16
Other Six Flag properties operate
17
structure a relatively small element in
17
until midnight and on some occasions
18
the mid -or -far -ground of the few
18
until one a.m. How is this going to be
19
locations from which such a structure
19
addressed? Are the residents of the
20
would be visible," end quote. Create a
20
bordering neighborhoods expected to
21
visual reference for yourself of this
21
welcome an increase in the amount of
22
height by picturing the CNA building in
22
time we have to listen to the noise
23
Glens Falls. Now imagine two of them
23
generators at Great Escape? We ask the
24
stacked on top of each other and add 20
24
board to be specific in restricting the
3-12
Public Hearing
CondenseIt'
Page 45
August 29, 2000
Page
47
1
hours of operation to not exceed current
1
As stated in this document, the
I3
2
hours.
Page 2 of the Executive Summary
2
3
Planning Board's approval of the
infrastructure expansion requested is to
4
states, and I quote, "As documented in
4
do so with the implied intent to then
5
this Impact Statement, the support
5
approve the rides necessary to support
'
6
facilities which the park proposes in
6
that growth at the Great Escape. The
7
this project, are intended to support
7
compromised environmental setting that
8
and accommodate growth in patronage
8
the park resides within, accompanied by
9
while providing for improved levels of
9
the adjacent residential neighborhoods,
'
10
environmental quality for potential
10
makes this type of expansion
11
impacts on traffic congestion, water
11
undesirable. The various mitigation
12
quality, wetlands protection, storm
12
measures offered in this study do not
13
water management, cultural resources and
13
begin to give any truly effective
14
visual impacts, community character, and
14
solution to current or future issues.
15
16
audible noise" Nowhere in this study is
there any documentation that audible
15
16
I believe the Planning Board will
give strong consideration to requiring
17
noise will improve, that the visual
17
the Great Escape to provide a more
18
impact will improve, that the character
18
thorough documented examination of this
'
19
of the adjacent neighborhoods will
19
project. The implications for our
20
improve. We are already experiencing
20
community are too vast in scope to give
21
negative impacts as a result of the
21
a cursory study of the involved impacts.
22
current operation of the Great Escape.
22
Thank you for the opportunity to address
23
How could a conclusion be drawn that
23
the board.
24
conditions will be improve? And where
24
SPEAKER: Karen Angleson, One
Page 46
Page 48
i
is the data to support these statements?
1
Greenwood Lane, Queensbury. I would
2
Volume 7, page 7-3, volume one,
2
like to thank the Planning Board for the
3
states, quotations, "Development of a
3
opportunity for present comment. This
4
parking garage would be cost
4
the Great Escape's Draft Generic
5
prohibitive," end quote.
5
Environmental Impact Statement contains
6
Page 4-6 of volume one indicates
6
much data that needs to be carefully
7
that approximately 11.5 acres of woods
7
reviewed. This review needs to be done
8
and 5.4 acres of lawn will be disturbed
8
allowing for comments both verbally and
9
by the project to provide parking.
9
in writing. The comment times need to
10
SEQRA requires, quote, "The applicant
10
be extended for at least six months in
i l
provide an evaluation of the range of
i l
my opinion. To not do this would be a
12
alternatives at a level of detail
12
disservice to your community and to the
13
sufficient to permit a comparative
13
area as a whole.
14
assessment of the alternatives
14
We are adjacent to the Lake George
15
16
discussed," end quote. The heavily
wooded area in question is the last
15
16
watershed and the Adirondack Park. We
are at the foothills of the Adirondacks
17
substantially noise.and visual buffer
17
and need to carefully review what is
18
from Route 9 and the I-87 for the
18
being proposed and act accordingly. We
19
neighbors. Preservation of the existing
19
need to plan something that we can be
20
topography should be addressed as an
20
proud of, not just for the present but
21
alternative to decreasing the current
21
for future generations. Were noise
22
elevation and removal of trees from the
22
barriers never considered? If not, why
23
Animal Land property to the Samoset
23
not? These could be attractive and very
24
property to provide parking.
24
effective.
3-13
I
Public Hearing CondenseIt"
August 29, 2000
'
Page 49
Page 51
-
1
There is as addressed in 4.8.2 on
1
there is causal relationship between
'
2
3
page 421 discussing of increased noise
problem which might probably arise from
2
3
growth and visitor attendance, the
corresponding level of park operations
4
change in topography from clearing and
4
and no increase in audible noise impacts
5
grading activities for the new project
5
in the neighborhoods. The park is
'
6
construction and installation of new and
6
committed to baseline impacts by
7
particularly noisy rides like the Alpine
7
retrofitting noise abatement measures on
8
Bobsled with a potential for off -site
8
the Bobsled ride as stated in 4.8.2.
9
audible noise impact. Does that mean
9
This has not been accomplished. The
'
10
that the Bobsled stays as is? On page
10
Bobsled is still very loud as the park
11
4-21 the document states that the hill
11
management is well aware. As mentioned "
12
within the U.S. Route 9 corridor which
12
above, the Bobsled provides off site
'
13
protects the receptor neighborhood from
13
audible noise impact.
14
major noise will not be eliminated. But
14
I also question the statement there
'
15
16
the cross -sectional illustrations of
figure 410 and 411 and 412 show removal
15
16
is no causal relationship between growth
and visitor attendance and the increase
17
of land and trees to these areas. And I
17
in audible noise. I ask the board and
18
quote, "Any change in landscaping for
18
anyone here present to tell me thai
'
19
the project such as the landscaping of
19
there is no increase in audible noise,
20
the parking lots along the corridor will
20
if you have even two or three more
21
have no affect on noise propagation from
21
people in your yard or your house,
'
22
the Northway." Has this been
22
especially if these people are doing
23
substantiated? Please provide the board
23
such activities as one does in an
24
the data.
24
amusement park.
'
Page 50
Page 52
I
These changes occur in the Samoset
1
The document says that the purposes
2
Motel area and in the Animal Land,
2
and need for expansion is to allow the
'
3
Martha's Motel area. The document
3
park to build needed infrastructure and
4
further states that vegetation must be
4
support facilities, to improve its
5
20 to 100 feet wide with shrub growth
5
customer access to generally accommodate
6
and a height of 15 feet or more to be
6
growth and attendance during a period of
'
7
effective to a two to six decibel sound
7
several years from its current level the
8
change. How will removing lands and
8
projected project will strengthen the
9
trees and replacing them with plantings,
9
local tourist industry, the benefits
'
10
landscape clusters and blacktop
10
will grow and expand the area visitors.
11
accomplish this?
I
See page 2 of the executive study. Have
12
On page 2-10 the document further
12
these additional issues been discussed;
'
13
states that a variety of plantings will
13
such as how will the park additional
14
be used and that the parking lot will
14
traffic move, provide plans for handling
'
15
16
not be the typical layout but a festival
style. This festival style would have
15
16
the traffic that will leave the park and
not go on to the Northway9 Will it go
17
to be approved yet the document
17
into neighborhoods and cause congestion
18
considers it a fact and proceeds to
18
and noise, wastewater and environmental
'
19
describe the planting.
19
factors that this additional traffic
20
The document further states there
20
will cause on the secondary roads?
21
will not be significant long term or
21
There is a lot of growth in the
'
22
cumulative audible noise impact from the
22
Town of Queensbury with an increase in.
23
project on the neighborhood studied in
23
housing plan for the Hilands area as an
24
the DGEIs. The document goes on to say
24
example. This traffic will also be
3-14
Public Hearing
CondenseIt'
August 29, 2000
'
Page 53
Page 55
1
utilizing the same secondary roads that
i
and the addition of rides and
'
2
3
come from Route 9. Where is this
discussed as potential issue and how has
2
3
attractions page 39 states there was an
increase of 8.2 decibels in Courthouse
4
it been addressed? Noise in
4
and 5.7 in Twicwood.
5
environmental level class should include
5
Six Flags is proud of their scream
'
6
these protected increases in population
6
machines. If you go to their web site
7
growth and traffic when projecting the
7
BBB Six Flags.com you can find the sites
8
increased anticipation by the park. The
8
of the United States and worldwide that
9
document states that no continuous noise
9
they own. Their advertisements really
'
10
from the park was discernible during the
l0
emphasize the new scream rides
11
monitoring period. It goes on to say
I
describing them in details with lots of
12
intrusive noise in the Twicwood site was
12
loud music including their height.
'
13
primarily due to vehicular traffic on
13
The issues I have addressed are
14
Greenwood Lane other noise problems,
14
just a few of the contradictions that
'
15
16
children, aircraft and a mail truck.
During the entirety of the monitoring
15
16
need review. And we need to take this
opportunity to make our area a place
17
process no intrusive noises were heard
17
we can be proud of. I have attached the
18
coming from the direction of the park
18
names of and the addresses of Six Flags
'
19
except for a faint bang. This was
19
sites in the United States. I strongly
20
quoted from 4.0 monitoring results and
20
suggest that the planning staff or
21
observations 4.1.1. The document also
21
members of the Planning Board inquire of
'
22
goes on to say on 4.2 is there will not
22
these towns or cities regarding the
23
be significant long term or cumulative
23
compliance with the areas that are being
24
auto effect. I would just like to point
24
addressed here tonight, such as
'
Page 54
Page 56
I
out to the Planning Board some
1
environment, noise, water quality and
2
interesting information on the effects
2
traffic by Six Flags.
'
3
of noise on health and well-being. The
3
Another question to pose of these
4
following is quoted from effect on noise
4
people is where are these parks located
5
on health and well-being and taken from
5
in relation to neighborhoods, wetlands
6
BBB, a web site, Conscious Choice.
6
scenic views and other areas of concern?
'
7
Because noise often does not produce
7
Thank.you.
8
visible effect and because there is
8
MS. LaBOMBARD: Linda McNulty and
9
usually not a distinct cause and effect
9
Chuck McNulty, would you come up, and
'
10
relationship between a single noise
10
Donald Milne.
I
event and clear adverse health effect,
11
SPEAKER: Linda McNulty, number 14
12
some people believe noise does not pose
12
Twicwood Lane. I spent about two weeks
'
13
a serious risk to human health, but
13
reading over the traffic. I spent the
14
evidence from a number of recent studies
14
last two weeks reading over the traffic
'
15
16
especially on children provide ample
proof that noise harms human health and
15
16
study that was done for the DGEIS, and I
found several things that were either
17
decreases quality of life. While noise
17
contrary to popular belief and actuality
18
usually will not kill, it can certainly
18
in our neighborhood. And well not in
'
19
make hour lives miserable.
19
our neighborhood particularly but in
20
On page 423 the document states
20
traveling the area going from the Lake
21
that the 1990 sound levels of the
21
George area delivering a contract to the
'
22
environmental monitoring sites have
22
Glens Falls area the other day, it was
23
remained unchanged over the past ten
23
just a mob scene between Route 149,1
24
years. Despite increases in attendance
24
had gotten off at Gurney Lane, I cut
-
3-15
Public Hearing CondenseIt'
August 29, 2000
t
Page 57
Page 59
1
over through the municipal parking area
1
freeway. We also feel like we are
2
to Glen Lake Road, Tee Hill, and I found
2
living in the center of the amusement
'
3
that there are several other cars
3
park. This shouldn't be the situation
4
following me or in front of me doing the
4
in a housing development. I really feel
'
5
6
same thing. That is not one of the
collector roads that is indicated in the
5
6
that they should be made to mitigate the
present sound problems before they are
7
traffic study. However, the other area
7
even allowed expansion. I would also
8
roads are impacted by the traffic in the
8
highly recommend a five year waiting
'
9
Great Escape area because you just can't
9
period to try to resolve some of these
10
get either down the Northway, up the
10
issues before they even begin expanding.
11
Northway or around there in any kind of
11
The noise is traveling to further
12
a timely fashion.
12
developments. It is not just our
'
13
I can't possibly understand how
13
Twicwood area. I am hearing complaints
14
expanding this park they are talking
14
from people that are trying to golf at
15
about increasing the 1.5 million people
15
the Glens Falls Country Club, people
'
16
attending and the traffic study
16
that are living over in the Bay Ridge
17
indicated that they are averaging about
17
area off of Bay Road. They are now
i
18
three people per vehicle that's coming
18
hearing the screams from the people on
'
19
to the park. In my math I gather it is
19
the roller coaster. The west side of
20
500,000 vehicles that they are
20
Route 9 they are hearing developments
t22
21
predicting per day. I can't visualize
Route 9 being able to handle that even
21
22
over there where it is crossing Rush
Pond. I really feel that this is a
23
with the internal roads that they are
23
negative and unwanted thing for our
24
planning on putting in. The internal
24
community. Thank you.
Page 58
Page 60
1
roads I am also wondering about whether
1
SPEAKER: Chuck McNulty. In my
'
2
3
they are one way, how people are going
to get out when they need to get out for
2
3
opinion this GEIS is inadequate and
frankly dishonest and I think it will
4
emergencies or just because they have
4
continue to the public's distrust of the
5
had enough of the day.
5
Great Escape management. I will cite
'
6
The exiting from 1-87 onto Gurney
6
just a few examples of what bothers me
7
Lane it takes three to five minutes if
7
about the work effort and leads me to
8
you are coming south getting onto Gurney
8
conclude that the offers are at best
'
9
Lane. It is a left-hand turn. You have
9
attempting to mislead the public and the
10
got traffic coming across from Route 9.
10
town decision makers, and at worse are
11
It is an impossible situation not only
11
incompetent and dishonest in the traffic
12
that it's dangerous because of the
12
study.
13
visibility is very limited. The bridge
13
The authors discuss several
14
side rails are high enough that you
14
intersections controlled by traffic
15
cannot see traffic coming across the
15
lights. And after acknowledging each is
16
bridge to half the time you are out
16
currently a problem, they offer a
17
across the Gurney Lane area and you have
17
magical cure, all of changing the light
18
a car within maybe 100 feet of you or
18
cycle. As an example they suggest that
19
less. And they travel quickly through
19
all the congestion and backup on I-87 at
20
there. They don't just putt along.
20
the northbound exit 20 ramp can be
21
The Great Escape is proposing to
21
eliminated by eliminating the exclusion
'
22
remove several trees from the Route 9
22
after Route 9 park of the cycle. They
23
corridor and already the traffic noise
23
fail to explain how anyone is to make a
24
is we feel like we are living on a
24
left turn at that point from Route 9 on
3-16
1
Yubllc rieanng CondenselC'
August 29, 2000
Page 61
Page 63
1
to the entrance ramp of northbound 87
1
a half mile away, or deep base boom both
2
without the green arrow, which is part
2
from roller-skating rinks. And, yes,
3
of that exclusive Route 9 northbound
3
all these should be a part of the Great
4
cycle. They also fail to adequately
4
Escape's GEIS by being where it is and
5
acknowledge that the intersection is
5
having become a generic run of the mill
6
sometimes clogged by traffic backing up
6
thrill ride park instead of the
7
from the Route 9 northbound lane from as
7
children's theme park than what it was.
8
far as the light at 149.
8
Great Escape attracts similar businesses
9
Drivers northbound on Route 9 and
9
and the patrons that go to these
10
exit 20 are now currently crossing the
10
businesses and therefore are a
I i
double yellow line and driving up the
11
contributor to some of the noise that
12
middle of the road in an attempt to make .
12
these businesses create. And I think
13
left turn onto I-87 going north at that
13
the GEIS ought to take into account
14
exit. I can't understand how
14
these ancillary impacts.
15
obliterating the left turn option on
15
On the sounds as a start I would
16
that light and doubling the amount of
16
recommend revising that old instruction
17
traffic that is headed for the Great
17
that says first you get rid of all the
18
Escape is going to make everything okay.
18
attorneys. I think should you should
19
1 think that applies to all the
19
get rid of attorneys and the engineers.
20
different traffic intersections that
20
1 don't care how loud. I don't care how
21
they have argued that they are solving
21
loud or how soft a ride a PA system or a
22
by just changing the light traffic or
22
band is. I shouldn't have to listen to
23
traffic signal.
23
it in my home.
24
The traffic study also fails to
24
The GEIS in evaluating noise impact
Page 62
Page 64
1
adequately discuss the impact of
1
should consider what bothers people, not
2
doubling of the traffic on I-87 and
2
what activates an engineer's decibel
3
Route 9 on other roads in the area. The
3
meter. The engineering approach that
4
impact is not just on Round Pond Road,
4
takes the attitude if I can't measure
5
not just on Glen Lake or Aviation Road.
5
it, it's not a problem, should be thrown
6
Local residents already use Montray
6
out. The major impact here is on people
7
Road, Country Club Road, Glenwood, Bay
7
not on engineering instruments.
8
Road, Wincrest, Oak Road, Sweet Road,
8
The project suggested in this
9
Haviland to avoid Route 9 when they are
9
document the attendance increases
10
traveling from any direction from their
10
envisioned will transform the town. It
11
homes north, south, east or west., -:How
I i
will destroy at least three residential
12
much more traffic will be forced into
12
neighborhoods and it will impact several
13
residential areas and non-residential
13
more. That should be obvious to any
14
streets and other roads of the town when
14
half competent consultant or town
15
the Great Escape attendance doubles?
15
official. That is what should be
16
The sound discussions are
16
clearly stated in the GEIS, whether the
17
engineering studies that totally dismiss
17
Great Escape likes it or not. The
18
the human aspect of the problem.
18
discussion should not be if there will
19
Residents of formerly quiet
19
be an impact. There is going to be one
20
neighborhoods shouldn't have to listen
20
hell of an impact. It should be whether
21
to rock bands, ride noises, people
21
the Town of Queensbury is going to
22
screaming PA announcements from car
22
become a gaudy commercial area or
23
salesmen, PA announcements for go-cart
23
whether it's going to protect its
24
tracks, trucks roaring up the interstate
24
year-round residents and strive to be
3-17
Public Hearing
Condenselt"
August 29, 2000
'
Page 65
Page 67
1
what its signs say, it is a nice place
1
notable not only for its size, it's
2
3
to live. Right now -- (Applause).
Right now it's not a nice place to live
2
3
notable for numerous omissions, errors
and misstatements and contraindications.
4
and I think the town could be sued for
4
It goes overboard in attempting to
5
false advertising. Thank you.
5
emphasize the economic benefits of the
'
6
MS. LaBOMBARD: Next person is
6
park to the community, while minimizing
7
Donald Milne. And could George Stark be
7
the adverse impacts to the community.
8
ready as well as Barbara Bartwitz and
8
They talk about providing improved
'
9
Davie Harrington?
9
levels of environmental quality for
10
SPEAKER: Mr. MacEwan, could I have
10
potential impacts on water quality, and
11
a point of order before my -- could I
11
they go on and on.
12
have a minute for a point of order
12
I respectfully ask the board if we
'
13
before my time for speaking starts?
13
are to believe that the addition of a
14
MR. CHAIRMAN: What is on your
14
200 foot high roller coaster in front of
15
mind?
15
our view of West Mountain improves the
'
16
SPEAKER: I wrote a letter
16
visual quality of the sight.
17
regarding additional time and I want to
17
1 respectfully ask the board if
t
18
19
express deep concern for the lack of
time to prepare analysis and commentary.
18
19
removal of every tree from the area of
the Samoset Motel south to The Coach
20
The size of this document, over 600
20
House Restaurant will result in unproved
21
pages, requires time to read and digest.
21
levels of storm water management in that
'
22
In addition, those neighborhoods
22
area.
23
affected must read to determine which
23
1 respectfully ask the board if the
24
questions determine analysis by
24
collection of runoff from parking lots
'
Page 66
Page 68
1
professional consultants. Then we have
I
on which 4,500 cars have been leaking
2
to hire those consultants and refer the
2
oil, gasoline and antifreeze will
'
3
impact.
3
improve our water quality.
4
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Milne, the input
4
With regard to omissions, the
5
that you want to give us can go beyond
5
scoping documents asks that noise levels
'
6
your verbal comment that you have
6
produced by the park within the adjacent
7
tonight. You have until September 12th
7
DGEIS area, shall be modeled, such
8
for written comment.
8
modeling shall consider the effect upon
9
SPEAKER: We still -- it is really
9
properties across Glen Lake that may be
'
10
not because we had to find consultants.
10
affected by noise carrying over water.
i i
We still haven't been able to get'=-
11
This document does not include such
12
MR. CHAIRMAN: That's fine. That's
12
modeling. Nowhere in the document could
'
13
why we are having the comment period.
13
I find that. And it does not include
14
SPEAKER: We would like it
14
studies of noise levels on properties
15
extended.
15
other than six houses adjacent to the
'
16
MR. CHAIRMAN: Your ten minutes
16
monitoring station on Birdsall Road.
17
starts now.
17
Their studies completely ignored and
'
18
19
MS. LaBOMBARD: Wait a second. We
were just advised by our counsel that --
18
19,
omit noise which has caused residents of
Fitzgerald Road, Ash Drive, Mannis Road,
20
MR. CHAIRMAN: Let's go. Move on.
20
Hall Road, Jay Road, Ivy Road, Glen Lake
'
21
22
MS. LaBOMBARD: — once you come
up, it is ten minutes.
21
22
Road and others to complain of noise
from the park.
23
MR. CHAIRMAN. Yes. That's --
23
The consultants adhered to the
24
SPEAKER: Okay. This document is
24
limits put forth in one other part of
3-18
Public Hearing CondenseIt" August 29, 2000
Page 69
Page 71
1 the scoping document, which called for
1 loading of the waters due to sewage
2 apples to apples comparison using the
2 effluent or runoff from the park.
3 same monitoring stations that Mr. Wood
3 Will the board require inclusion of
4 used in 1990 when he is putting in the
4 these and all homes fronting Glen Lake
5 Comet. However, they did add one
5 on the impact study?
6 monitoring station in the park which was
6 Storm water analysis also was
7 not included in the 1990 study. They
7 omitted for Park Area A. Since area A
8 chose not to add any stations in other
8 is adjacent to the sensitive wetland,
9 areas such as Glen Lake.
9 this is important.
10 Now notably the station used for
10 Will the board require that study?
11 Glen Lake was in an area where no
11 The document provides reference to
12 resident complaints have been issued
12 plantings, but no specifications on the
13 because residents claim the noise from
13 size of trees or whether those plantings
14 the park is blocked by the hill and the
14 will be trees, shrubs or ground cover.
15 trees. They further stated in the DGEIS
15 Will the board require such analysis and
16 that the hill is very effective in
16 specification?
17 limiting noise propagation. However, in
17 Now section 6, the authors they
18 other areas of Glen Lake they are
18 talk about vegetation removal, talk
19 hearing the noise, and the results of
19 about removal of large trees such as
20 this single station are the basis for
20 that for northern area C. Large trees
21 fallacious claims in this document that
21 absorb large quantities of nutrient
22 noise is not a problem for Glen Lake.
22 which do not reach groundwater. Will
23 Now will the board require an
23 the board require analysis of the
24 analysis of the effect of noise carrying
24 effects on groundwater from this
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Page 70
Page 72
over water as called for in the scoping
1
removal?
document?
2
Regarding sewage errors in Section
Will the board require additional
3
2.1.10 bring into question all the data
testing with monitoring stations along
4
and conclusions in this section. First,
shoreline, along the shoreline? I
5
they indicate the volume of sewage from
emphasize shoreline locations, not on
6
the current theme park is 45,636 GPD.
roads behind hills and trees.
7
They estimate the park, the theme park
Now another omission describing
8
with expansion produce only 60,000 GPD.
land use they identify the Glen Lake
9
My numbers I have if based upon an
neighborhood within the study area as a
10
increase in visitors from approximately
group of six or seven homes. And figure
11
900,000 to 1.5 million, a factor of 1.5,
one, one -one which shows the project
12
the volume with expansion should be
location map shows the primary study
13
68,454 GPD, and the total volume is
area as including not just six or seven
14
103,454, not 95,000. Will this be
properties on Birdsall Road,
15
corrected and corrections made in the
conveniently located behind the hill
16
conclusions based upon this data?
incidentally, but includes all the
17
Now the document purports to show
properties from the home owned by Touba
18
the system proposed will produce
on the northwest shore to Powell on the
19
effluent quality which is significantly
south shore. This includes 34 homes,
20
better than DEC standards. However, the
not six. In addition, they should have
21
proposed level for phosphorous discharge
included all residences on Glen Lake
22
only just meets DEC potential effluent
since they are impacted visually,
23
standards. Glen Lake cannot
audibly and by the increase nutrient
24
biologically afford any additional
3-19
Public Hearing
CondenseIt'
August 29, 2000
'
Page 73
Page 75
1
phosphorus loading.
1
known to the engineers formulating this
2
3
Will measures of current phosphorus
be taken and analysis of future
2
3
report.
This spring those parking lots were
4
phosphorous in Glen Lake and the
4
completely flooded for an extended
'
5
6
watershed be determined based on
additional loading?
5
6
period of time. That could not occur if
the water table were truly more than six
7
Sources at DEC have told us that
7
feet below grade. Will the board
8
phosphorous discharged to a river does
8
require test borings to verify data
'
9
not accumulate in a river as it does a
9
presented as fact in this document?
10. ,
lake. This accumulation will result in
10
Now regarding runoff, antifreeze,,
I i
a considerable degradation of the lake
1 I
ingredient is ethylene glycol. Cars in
12
over time. They strongly suggest that
12
our area nix with a 50 percent solution
13
the sewage from an expanded park be
13
of this. The BOD five of antifreeze is
14
handled via a sewer line connected to
14
5,000 milligrams per liter. The
15
the Glens Falls treatment plant.
15
biological oxygen demand for raw sewage
16
Will the comparison study of the
16
is only 250 to 300, so this stuff could
17
effects of ammonia, phosphorous and
17
have a deleterious effect on watershed.
18
19
biological oxygen demand on the
watershed and waters of Glen Lake be
18
19
Will traps or filters be employed -to
prevent hydrocarbons from entering
20
done which compares the alternative of
20
groundwater? Hydrocarbons, that's part
21
local sewage treatment versus transfer
21
of the Glen Lake watershed study. No.
22
of sewage to the Glens Falls treatment
22
Will you require an analysis be made of
23
plant?
23
additional hydrocarbons from Route 9 due
24
Regarding storm water management.
24
to additional traffic generated? This
'
Page 74
Page 76
1
They state, page 4-9, groundwater will
1
is not in this study.
2
3
not be impacted because no grading will
occur at or below the water table level.
2
3
The authors claim the project will
only slightly increase or produce no
4
And they claim the groundwater table is
4
increase in nutrient loading due to
5
more than six feet below grade. And
5
storm water runoff. This is not
'
6
Warren Soil Conservation which claims
6
acceptable at the present time because
7
the groundwater table in the Hinckley,
7
we are attempting to reduce nutrient
8
Hinckley, Plainfield and Oakville soils
8
loading in Glen Lake. We have several
9
is at a depth of more than six feet. I
9
projects that work. The DGEIS does not
10
challenge that assumption. The basis
10
include figures on the current
I 1
for the challenge is as follows: The
11
phosphorous levels in the Glen Lake
12
land upon which the existing parking
12
Brook in project area C. We need data
13
lots in area C were built as filled land
13
on levels in Park Area C and the fen
14
upon which gravel was brought in and
14
immediately after the park. Will these
15
filled over wetlands. The water table
15
studies be added to the DGEIS?
16
in those wetlands is the level of Glen
16
In summation, due to the location
17
Lake Brook. Those soils mentioned above 17
of this property which is placed in an
18
were brought in to raise the level of
18
environmentally sensitive area, the
t19
the land in area C above the wetland
19
wetland of the fen, the Glen Lake Brook,
20
upon which they are now located. Okay.
20
and the lake itself, and the close
21
Generalizations in the report regarding
21
proximity to residential neighborhoods,
22
the normal water table and those soils
22
its development must be limited. We can
23
does not apply to this situation.
23
not expect it to expand as other parks
24
Additionally, that fact should have been
24
such as Six Flags in Darien, which is
3-20
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Public Hearing
CondenseItu"
August 29, 2000
Page 77
Page 79
1
surrounded by acres of farmland.
1
address is Lake George. And we have
2
Common sense dictates that a 200
2
seen the Great Escape grow over these 24
3
foot high roller coaster has an enormous
3
years. Premiere Park bought it. They
4
impact. Enormous impact. Common sense
4
expanded it quite a bit and we are
5
dictates 90,000 gallons per day of
5
expanding our business. The economic
6
effluent going into the soils 100 feet ;
6
impact of the Great Escape, I am sure
7
from the fen has an enormous impact.
7
everyone knows there is 22,000 people
8
Common sense dictates that we must not
8
roughly in Queensbury, and over 4,000
9
allow hydrocarbons to be released from
9
season tickets were sold to residents in
10
4,500 cars. Given past code violations,
10
Queensbury to the Great Escape. I mean,
i i
are we willing to trust this corporation
I 1
people use this. The money that this
12
with the well-being of our valuable
12
generates is throughout the whole
13
watershed? Will this board take into
13
economy here, not just to me or to
14
account past violation patterns when
14
business owners, but everyone. All I
15
weighing data which show limits at or
15
can say is that, you know, there is
16
near allowable standards? Are we to
16
tremendous economic impact. Give the
17
trade the peace and tranquility of a
17
Great Escape a chance for the Final
18
beautiful area in the pursuit of
18
Environmental Impact Statement to
19
profits?
19
address these concerns.
20
For the record, I was speaking for
20
I agree with a lot of these
21
the Glen Lake Association.
21
concerns Mr. McNulty and Mrs. McNulty
22
MS. LaBOMBARD: George Stark is
22
talked about all how these access roads.
23
going to speak, but could Anna Fowler
23
1 am guilty of that myself when I come
24
and James Underwood be ready.
24
down Route 9 a lot of times I go 149,
Page 78
Page 80
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
21
22
23
SPEAKER: Planning Board members.
Probably the most unpopular person here
today because I am going to speak in
favor of what the Great Escape is
proposing. The Draft Environmental
Impact Statement is just that, it is a
Draft Environmental Impact Statement.
It is not the Final Generic
Environmental Impact Statement. They
still have the opportunity to take all
the comments that are here tonight,
digest them, go over them and put them
into the Final Impact Statement. That's
the purpose of the Draft Environmental
Impact Statement. I didn't read the
whole Draft Environmental Impact
Statement, I mean, and I imagine most
people did not here. There is lot of
technical data in there that I plain
just don't understand.
What I do understand is that I
owned a motel for 24 years. The Mohican
Motel on Route 9 in Lake George. It's
in the Town of Queensbury. Mailing
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
3-21
take a right, go through Tee Hill Road,
and I end up going down to Bay Road to
get downtown or north to exit 21, get on
the Northway, get off exit 18 or 19
depending where I am going. Right now
the situation from the Trading Post down
to Pirate's Cove is pretty bad. I
agree. But hopefully they will be able
to mitigate some of those traffic
concerns by the ring road and their
parking they can get the people in and
out faster and everything. I don't
agree with everything they want to do,
but it is a corporation and they have,
should have the right to expand. That's
all I have to say. Thank you very much.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
MS. LaBOMBARD: Barbara Bartwitz
and Dave Harrington. I guess you are
going to speak together.
SPEAKER: Thank you, Planning
Board, for allowing us to have the time
tonight. I am Dave Harrington. This is
Barb Bartwitz. We are co -directors to
1
11
I
d
I
1
I
Public
1 the Prospect Mountain Road Race and we
2 represent the Adirondack Runners. We
3 heard a tremendous amount of negativism
4 from the community. We would like to
5 present a little bit of positive that
6 the Great Escape does for the community.
7 Barb.
_
8 SPEAKER: Through the sponsorship
9 of Great Escape, we are able to put on a
10 much better race, a higher quality race.
11 It attracts runners locally, out of the
12 area, out of the state. This increases
13 revenues for the local merchants. We
14 purchase shirts for the runners, for the
15 volunteers, food, awards all through
16 small residents to keep the revenues
17 here in the community. Ten percent of
18 the profits go to the Adirondack Runners
19 scholarships. The rest, the remaining
20 goes to the Michelle Lafountain's
21 Nursing Scholarship, Adirondack
22 Community College. All these things
23 would not be possible without the
24 sponsorship of Great Escape.
CondenseIt"
Page 81
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
I
When they help the Adirondack
2
Runners, they are also helping local
3
businesses, the high school teams brings
4
out of town runners and their families
5
into the community. It's putting funds
6
back into the community. I think we
7
need to give them a chance to address
8
the issues everything is doing but do
9
everything we can to let them in turn
10
help us. That's all I have to say.
11
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much.
12
MS. LaBOMBARD: Annie Fowler and
13
James Underwood will be next. Kevin
14
Dineen and Ed Lewi.
15
SPEAKER: Hi. Anna Fowler, 96 Ash
16
Drive on Glen Lake. I am the secretary
17
for the Glen Lake Protective
18
Association, and I was giving out blue
19
ribbons earlier. I used up almost 30
20
yards, so I wonder if all of you guys --
21
MR. CHAIRMAN: I ask that we not do
22
that, just address the board.
23
SPEAKER: Well, you can look out
24
and see the blue ribbons. Raise your
Page 82
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
3-22
August 29, 2000
Page 83
hands. Thanks.
First of all, I just want to say
for me as a layperson it is rather
overwhelming to come into the library
and with my eight year old boy and find
this stack of stuff that I tried to go
over and I did attempt to go over the
first part. But I felt like we are at a
huge disadvantage as lay people to be
trying to look over a couple of copies
between all of us and try to make sense
of this in such a short time.
There are several things that I
felt will have a strong adverse impact,
unlike what they seem to be saying in
this document. There is the storm water
management for the paved parking lots,
which involves PVC piping, perforated
PVC piping going underneath the pavement
so that the water will go into the
ground under the pavement. That does
not address the fact that the cars will
be increasing in numbers by around 2,000
or more than 2,000 cars parking spaces
available. That's what I mean. So that
will mean an increase in chemicals and
hydrocarbons coming into that
groundwater, which I do not feel or I am
not sure whether or not the natural
systems will be able to handle that.
And that was not addressed in the
document.
The noise studies have been
mentioned before and the fact that
they -- it says that the background
noise levels have not changed over the
past decade for the receptor and
neighborhoods to me says that the noise
study is not accurate and has some
problems with it. And especially of
course the Bobsled. And one thing I
would like to say is if it can not be
properly mitigated, I wonder if it could
be removed. That is perhaps the best
thing to do with it. Also not address
as has been mentioned noise problems
involved with taking out a huge area of
trees and land. And I then also those
Page 84
Public Hearing
CondenseIt'M
August 29, 2000
'
Page 85
Page 87
1
trees are absorbing nutrients and runoff
1
been sighted. The other ones that are
'
2
3
from the I-87, and that has already been
mentioned but that is going to be a huge
2
3
not included are the great homed owl,
barrelled owl, hooded merganser,
common
a
impact.
4
loon. The merganser and loon come
5
The visual impact could bevery
5
through on migration. I didn't really
6
big. I look at the visibility analysis
6
have time to determine if there are
7
maps and saw that most or all of the
7
other ones but those are ones that came
8
wetland would be impacted and large
8
up at me immediately.
'
9
areas of Glen Lake would be impacted.
9
The source that was used for the
10
In one case over 50 percent of Glen Lake
10
bird list was 1988 document, which is
I 1
would be impacted by this, the 200 foot
11
not up to date. Bird populations have
12
tower. In photograph 14 there is view
12
changed a great deal since then. And my
'
13
of the wetland from the bike trail that
13
main thought is that the project is on a
14
shows where you could see the 200 foot
14
wetland. It is a very environmentally
15
tower, and that from looking at that
15
sensitive area and the vast scale
'
16
photograph I can see that the impact
16
proposed is just not acceptable as far
17
would be tremendous in that area. And 1
17
as environmental impact. And it will
18
19
enjoy that view. That view used to be
pristine before the nightmare came up
18
19
be, it will definitely have a
detrimental impact if it goes on at this
20
over the tree line, and now the
20
scale.
21
nightmare is kind of peaking up over
21
1 am not saying that I am against
'
22
there. But a 200 foot or higher ride
22
Great Escape per se. I just feel that
23
would have a huge impact on that view.
23
we can't allow this huge scale to have
24
And I also know that many people like to
24
occur in this location and that it will
Page 86
-Page 88
1
canoe and kayak and fish in that area
1
be detriment to all of us who live near
2
and it would also be a large impact
2
the water that depend on the wetland.
'
3
there.
3
So that's all. Thank you for letting me
4
One question I had about the full
4
speak.
5
replacement simulation photos. Will
5
SPEAKER: My name is James
6
there be an impact on the bike trail
6
Underwood. I live at 99 Mannis Road
7
electric lines? And if so, we need to
7
over on Glen Lake. Through the years I
8
see some photos like that on what that
8
have been involved with the Glen Lake
9
impact would be because that is a very
9
Protective Association with doing the
'
10
scenic area of the bike trail, the best
10
water studies on the lake, and also in
11
part.
it
drawing up the lake plan. One of the
12
So as far as potential wildlife
12
things I would like to address tonight
13
occurring on the Great Escape
13
is the massive amount of parking lots
14
properties, I saw a number of omissions
14
that are proposed over on the other side
15
in the bird life. And I am trained in .
15
of Route 9, and the effect that they
16
ornithology. There is no mention of the
16
will have on the lake if they are done
17
osprey, which is the most the biggest
17
in the present form that they propose.
'
i8
19
one. I saw that has been cited many
times in the primary study area and also
18
19
1 have no doubt that probably some
blacktopping is going to be necessary
20
is nesting on Glen Lake. And I consider
20
maybe around the immediate area where
21
the wetlands and the lake to be one
21
they are approaching the bridge over the
'
22
system since the water is all connected
22
Northway. I mean, over the Route 9.
23
so that should be included. The bald
23
But at the same time I would think that
24
eagle should also be included. That has
24
for the most part when we have a summer
3-23
'
Public Hearing
CondenseIt'
August 29, 2000
Page 89
Page 91
1
as we have just had. We have to keep in
1
than having them all collected in
2
3
mind the fact that this operation is
only going to be viable for three months
2
3
collection basins, whatever, and then
directly into in straight to ground
4
out of the year when we have a year like
4
water in a vast quantity. That is just
5
6
this, when we have an incredible amount
of rainfall, much more so than normal
5
6
something I wish you would address.
Thank you.
7
that the detrimental effect of having,
7
MS. LaBOMBARD: Next is Kevin
8
excuse me, a vast blacktop area have
8
Dineen. Could we have George Stec and
9
going to have a definite affect on the
9
David McGowan on deck.
10
water of Glen Lake. When the
10
SPEAKER: Kevin Dineen. Good
I 1
groundwater is saturated as it is in a
I 1
evening. I am an 18 year resident of
12
year like this, it is even more
12
Queensbury. I am here tonight to
13
noticeable as we have had effects on our
13
represent my family, my brothers, my
14
lake in this area and probably all the
14
sisters, and I think more importantly,
15
lakes in the area have been the same.
15
my kids and my nieces and nephews. I am
16
What I would propose many of the
16
a professional athlete by trade and it
17
outside like parking lots they proposed
17
has given me an opportunity to travel
18
19
over in back of Martha's, some of the
ones up the hill in the other direction,
18
19
the world and meet people from all over
the world. And I can't tell you how
20
rather than blacktopping them they would
20
proud I am to tell people and say I am
21
be kept in their natural state. Or if
21
from the Lake George area. I love to
22
they are going to propose new ones, that
22
tell them about our beautiful lakes our
23
they be grassed over areas. I know that
23
bike paths, our beautiful mountain
24
they complained that they wouldn't be
24
views, our golf courses, our skiing,
'
Page 90
Page 92
1
able to put their parking lines to pack
1
fishing, our outlets, Saratoga, and our
2
the cars in there, but they could go out
2
amusements parks. I think they are all
3
to as they do over the athletic field
3
part of the Lake George experience. I
4
and put lines if they wanted to get that
4
think it is something that we all have
5
technical about doing it. At the same
5
something to be extremely proud of.
6
time I think the natural surfaces would
6
The Great Escape has been a Lake
7
allow to better percolation of runoff
7
George presence for decades. I think it
8
when we do have rain instances, we have
8
started as a locally owned business
9
to keep in find the fact that when
9
where you would could get a summer job.
10
people arrive they park their cars and
10
I think probably a lot of people here
I
they don't come back to their cars for
11
may have worked there as kid. It has
12
hours and hours and hours. So the fact
12
always been a good neighbor. They have
'
13
that blacktop is there is really
13
donated. They had people here tonight
14
unnecessary. It will be very quickly to
14
talking about how they have done well
15
make their way to pathways that lead to
15
for the economy for different charities,
16
the crossover bridges that would allow
16
the Hole in the Woods camp, et cetera,
17
them to leave the areas where they are
17
et cetera. They have done a lot of
18
19
natural for better percolation.
Don Milne alluded to the affect of
18
19
business in the last ten years. There
has been a lot of changes. There is
20
antifreeze and oils and heavy metals
20
one, the biggest roller coaster, the
21
that you know are in the oils that drip
21
wooden roller coaster, they added water
22
out of cars on a regular basis, and I
22
rides that carry millions of gallons of
23
just think the dissipation of these
23
water, which I think a lot of people
24
would occur in a greater manner rather
24
addressed here. I think the Alpine
3-24
_
Public Hearing
CondenseltTm
August 29, 2000
Page 93
Page 95
'
I
Slide probably might be the noisiest
1
high, it doesn't change.
2
3
ride in the world. So there has been a
lot of changes. We are not where we
2
3
At this kind of intimidating
experience getting up in front. I know
4
were at one time.
4
it is a thankless job you all have is to
5
6
All these have meant different
things. They meant increased traffic,
5
6
hear this and make some rulings, but I
really believe you all may never have a
7
increased noise and increased adverse
7
more important ruling than you do on the
8
affect on our with the land. I
8
Great Escape. It will affect your kids
'
9
personally don't have the time or
9
and my kids for years to come.
10
knowledge to do studies on the noise or
10
(Applause.) I guess what I really
11
water quality, but certainly I can tell
11
wanted to say is you really have to
12
you what my senses tell me living on the
12
understand what this is really all about
13
lake and being around there, the
13
tonight and this whole thing, and it's
14
wetland. I talked to anybody that was
14
not too much about the impact study and
15
here, I would say that this year is
15
the traffic and the noise and the
16
probably the worse year you have ever
16
wetland. It is not going to improve the
17
seen the lake on the lake. The quality
17
theme park experience to get bigger and
'
18
19
of the lake is probably as bad as it has
ever been. Whether Great Escape is
18
19
better. The fun factor is not going to
go up much higher. It is all about big
20
responsible for that, I don't know. But
20
money is what it is. It is big money.
21
the lake is not what it once was. The
21
You are a long way from Kansas. Story
22
noise. I think your ears certainly.
22
Town is long gone. We are now dealing
23
don't lie. You talk to people tonight,
23
with Six Flags Incorporated. You are
24
no matter what they say, you know, you
24
talking about a publicly traded stock.
Page 94
Page 96
1
hear it. It's out there.
1
The stock is down right now. All of
2
They say you guys spent $70,000 in
2
sudden something goes through what
3
improvements this year. They fix the
3
happens the stock goes up. Okay? So
4
tires. I am not sure if Firestone might
4
you are dealing with big business. We
5
have did their tires. So but that's and
5
have high paid consultants here to do a
6
all seriousness, it's very, very loud
6
job. It is understandable. That's what
7
and it is an issue with all of us. I
7
they do. Is that bad? Is that bad for
8
think that is a lot of the reason we are
8
the area? I think that is what we are
9
here. The increased traffic.
9
here to decide what's bad. I -- like I
'
10
I mean, I play a sport where every
10
said, I think they have been a good
11
night we empty out of a parking lot
1 I
neighbor but they have spent millions of
12
17,000, we are talking about putting
12
dollars to buy the lands. They are
13
another 600,000 people in the
13
spending millions of dollars for this.
14
neighborhood, the amount of when I
14
They are spending lots of money for
15
played in Ottawa they put in a ten
15
these studies. I think we have to
16
million dollar ramp they had to do for
16
understand we are dealing with a very,
17
parking problem. It takes 45 minutes to .
17
very big business. It doesn't have
'
i8
19
an hour to get out. Once these things
start happening, once we get to a point
18
19
anything to do with what this has to do
with bringing in extra 600,000 people a
20
like with the roller coaster we are
20
summer. And that's what we have to
21
trying to address by changing the
21
address. I hope when you all sit down
22
wheels. That kind of change once you
22
and study this you think long and hard
23
get there, it doesn't change. Once you
23
about this. Thanks. (Applause.)
24
build a roller coaster so many feet
24
SPEAUR: Good evening. My name is
3-25
i
'
Public Hearing Condenselt"
August 29, 2000
Page 97
Page 99
i
Ed Lewi and I am a marketer and I have
1
huge part.
2
marketed something called Story Town for
2
And I know from my small dealings
3
over 40 years. I have not got up in
3
with the Six Flags folks that they will
4
front of a group like this and spoke
4
do the environmental right thing when it
5
6
before. I have gone through
environmental hearings in the
5
6
comes along. I talked to the Warren
County Tourist Department today and they
7
Adirondacks. I was very much involved
7
gave me the latest figures. Since 1996,
8
in the 1980 Olympics and ski jumps and
8
and that's when the folks from Premiere,
'
9
all kind of things. All I can tell
9
now Six Flags came to town, there has
10
you is I know nothing about water. I
10
been a growth of 45 percent in tourism
I
know nothing about the environment but I
I
in Warren County. That's quite a growth
12
do know about marketing.
12
pattern. That's taxes, that's business,
13
And the history of Story Town is
13
that's new homes.
14
that Charlie Wood, you all know the
14
I heard somebody mention tonight
15
history, Charlie started Story Town and
15
that the new homes in Queensbury are
'
16
when he spent dollars things increase.
16
getting more and more. There are more
17
More motels came. More business came.
17
and more homes, and you know a lot of
18
And it was a continuing effort by
18
things happen. The number of visitors,
'
19
Charlie Wood to make this thing all
19
annual visitors now exceeds 3.5 million.
20
happen, you know. Yes, he made money
20
These are the figures I received today
21
22
but he also gave money back to this
community in many, many ways and many,
21
22
from Warren County tourism department.
The Great Escape caters to thousands of
23
many donations. I started with Charlie
23
children. Especially the month of June
24
as a representative of the Adirondack
24
when there isn't really any real
Page 98
Page 100
1
Attractions. I represented all the
1
business in the market those school
2
3
Adirondack Attractions from the North
Pole to Land of Make Believe. And I
2
3
children didn't come in and spend money
and gas for the school bus us and
4
watched these attractions over the
4
everything. They definitely have an
5
years. The people who spent the money
5
impact.
6
continued in business. The people who
6
Six Flags has tried to extend the
7
didn't spend the money are now out of
7
season. One of the things as the
8
business.
8
marketer of the Adirondacks for years
'
9
Tourism is, I understand in the
9
and years was how do we get so it won't
10
Town of Queensbury one of your biggest .
10
just start on Memorial Day and end on
I
things that you do, you are a tourist
11
Labor Day, how do we get to expand the
12
community, you are part of the Lake
12
season so that more people have more
'
13
George area. I don't, I don't pretend
13
jobs, more things will happen, and these
14
to know. I know that most of these
14
folks have started to do that. They
15
folks in this room today are neighbors.
15
have opened up a little earlier and they
16
1 am not a neighbor. I am from Saratoga
16
are now closing in the end of October.
17
Springs.
17
There are an awful lot of people that
18
I happen to represent the race
18
are proud of the Great Escape and what
19
track. The race track this year spent
19
it represents.
20
eight and a half million dollars in
20
Again they are back to the race
21
22
improvements. It also poured this whole
week. We are up in attendance. I would
21
22
track. This is today's Times Union, and
it is a story about the Great Escape and
23
like to take the credit as a marketer
23
what the jockeys do on their day off.
24
but I think the improvements played a
24
And they quote how great it is. These
3-26
i
1
I
k
11
I
i
I
r
Public Hearing Condenselt'
Page 101
l are people from many different lands
1
2 these jockeys to come to the Great
2
3 Escape and they have a great time. Yes,
3
4 they could go to other places but the
4
5 Great Escape has given them something
5
6 that they want to come to.
6
7 So I think as a Planning Board you
7
8 certainly have to look into some of
8
9 these types of things. I don't have
9
10 anything more to say actually. I don't
10
i 1 want to waste everybody's time because a
11
12 lot of people have prepared themself and
12
13 everything about the environmental
13
14 impact. All I can tell you is that if
14
15 you don't let things grow, the impact
15
16 will be tremendous, and that's all I
16
17 really have to say. Thank you.
17
18 MS. LaBOMBARD: Next is George
18
19 Stec.
19
20 SPEAKER: Good evening, everyone,
20
21 and thank you, Planning Board, for
21
22 giving us this opportunity to speak our
22
23 opinions this evening. My name is
23
24 George I Stec, George Stec. What I am
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
17
18
19
29, 2000
Pagel03
concerned about lighting. I am
concerned about buffers. I am concerned
about parking.
My home is two miles away, and I
can see some of the rides protruding
above the trees. I can see the light
glow in the evening. I can hear
occasionally fireworks. And years ago,
yes, years ago, I used to hear the
people screaming two miles away. Maybe.
over the 35 years the trees beneath my
house have grown to the point where they
are acting as a good buffer for
screening out some of the noises.
My main concerns and some of these
have been addressed and will continue to
be addressed is the traffic. The noise.
And the more importantly, which I think
is the sewage disposal. Light as we
know on this planet is dependent on the
sun, the green plants and the water.
When you alter, change any of these
three things, the planet is headed for
big problems. And I think we are
Page 102
Page 104
about to present you are my personal
i
witnessing some of these going on today
opinions and observations. I am not a
2
with the floods from the south. I mean,
rocket scientist or nuclear engineer,
3
well, the eastern coast and the fires
but I have been in the area for 35 years
4
out west.
and I have been involved with some of
5
Over the years I have seen the
the environmental changes in the Great
6
character of the park change.
Escape land holdings. By nature I am
7
Drastically from a quaint children
retired state forest ranger, and my job
8
oriented park with short hours and short
has brought me into the environment of
9
season to an adult screaming park with
the Great Escape. I have been dealing
10
longer hours and extended seasons and
with some of those issues with regard to
1 I
special events. When the Premiere
wetlands since 1973, in '79, '80. And
12
Parks, Great Escape, when they bought
the filling in of the west side of
13
the lands, they invested seven and a
Route 9 was a travesty to this day. And
14
half million dollars, and originally
I envision more of this coming down the
15
this was proposed to address the parking
road.
16
and the traffic issues. Now I believe
Some of my concerns are I am
17
that if you are going to invest seven
concerned about the wetlands, the
18
and a half mullion dollars you do your
encroachment and destruction. I am
19
homework. I think they grabbed a tiger
concerned about the forestation between
20
by the tail, and I don't think they know
Route 9 and the Northway. I am
21
how long to go yet. This area is not
concerned about the pollution of Glen
22
suited for expansion. I see it as the
Lake. I am concerned about addressing
23
developers are trying to put ten pounds
the storm water, the runoff. I am
24
of sugar in a five pound bag. At this
3-27
I
I
LM
1
Public Hearing Condenselt'
August 29, 2000
1
Page 105
point the glass is already full.
1
Page 107
in, the money will be there. They can
2
But like I said previous, my major
2
pay for it. (Applause.)
3
concern is the sewage disposal on the
3
The sewer line and the Gambles, I
4
property. To me this is paramount. The
4
believe, Sweet Road from there to the
5
only solution is municipal sewage. Do
5
park is not that far. And if they have
6
not dispose of it in the park. Ship it
6
good faith, if their intentions are
7
out. Now the Great Escape is going to
7
good, if they want to do something for
8
say cost, cost, the dollars. They spent
8
the community as was previously noted in
9
seven and a half million dollars. Now
9
the June 30th meeting at Queensbury Town
10
they have to make good on it for the
10
Hall, put their money where their mouth
II
stockholders.
11
is here, excuse me, increase the sales
12
I am going to briefly give you some
12
tax on the tickets and pay for the
13
fact here. The Queensbury residents
13
sewer. Thank you.
14
face a twelve million dollar potential
14
MS. LaBOMBARD: David McGowan.
15
library expansion. Bear with me. The
15
SPEAKER: Good evening. My name is
16
Queensbury residents face major school
16
Dave McGowan. I live at 48 Birch Road.
17
district expansion in the next two or
17
And for those of you who don't know
18
three years. I am saying major school
18
that, that's on the side of Glen Lake
19
expand in the next two years, big tax
19
that is closest to the amusement park.
20
increases for the Queensbury people.
20
My wife and I moved here from, five
21
The Great Escape park lies in Lake
21
years ago, Kalamazoo, Michigan. We
22
George school district. No tax
22
chose to raise our family here primarily
23
belonging to the Queensbury school
23
because of the quality of life issues.
24
taxpayer. The Great Escape adult ticket
24
It is really a great place to be.
Page 106
Page 108
i
is S33 for the ticket. It has a 20 cent
1
We have three children right now,
2
sales tax on it. 20 cent sales tax on a
2
and we are not opposed to amusement
3
S33 item comes to .6 percent sales tax.
3
parks by any stretch of the imagination.
4
.6. And most of us when we go to Lowe's
4
We purchased Great Escape passes the
5
or any store around here, we pay seven
5
last three years running and we do
6
percent sales tax. They have the
6
frequent the park.
7
advantage of only charging .6. The 20
7
However, with that said, I am
8
cent or .6 tax in the area we are
8
strongly opposed to any additional
9
getting the benefits. When you look at
9
expansion proposed by the Great Escape.
10
the potential one and a half million
10
Point number one, I am very concerned
11
people coming into this park at .20
11
about the pollution that is going to be
12
cent, that is minimal. That's a
12
generated by the cars in the parking lot
13
travesty.
13
that will be added as proposed by the
14
My solution with regards to the
14
Great Escape. I am a chemical engineer
15
sewage in the park, like I said earlier,
15
by trade. I specialize in filtration
16
is to ship it out. My solution is to
16
equipment, and I have considerable
17
have -- is to have municipal sewage is
17
dealings with waste water issues. I am
18
to increase the tax on the admission
18
not going to go into technical details.
19
tickets, put the municipal sewers in for
19
However, I would like to say in
20
disposal on site of any sewage. Glen
20
industrial plants where you have
21
Lake and its environment don't need this
21
pollution issues that equipment requires
22
on the site. So ship the sewage out.
22
continuous monitoring and continuous
23
With the one and a half million, one and
23
maintenance to assure that the treatment
24
a half million people expected to come
24
methods are functioning properly.
3-28
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Public Hearing Condenselt"` August 29, 2000
Page 109
Page 111
1 What I would like to know, question
1 talk immediately about a noise
2 number one, how are we going to monitor
2 ordinance. I know there is some
3 that storm water runoff and assure that
3 difficulties with doing this, but we
4 it does not affect the actual quality of
4 need to put that in place now to prevent
5 Glen Lake?
5 any, any future rides from being put in
6 Point number two, nobody tonight
6 that's going to continue to degrade our
7 has mentioned property values, but I
7 quality of life.
8 know that is an issue that concerns many
8 Number six, regardless of how this
9 of us. I would like to know what are
9 comes out, the board should not under
10 you as the Planning Board going to do to
10 any circumstances grant the Great Escape
11 help us protect our property values and
11 any variances to the current Queensbury
12 keep our investments from eroding. Like
12 Building Code. Thank you.
13 myself there are many of us who work
13 SPEAKER: Good evening. My name is
14 very hard for our homes, and we don't
14 Kathleen Gowen. I am from Elm Drive,
15 want to see those property values
15 Glen Lake. I am a career forester and I
16 decreased.
16 fought forest fires for over a decade.
17 Point number three, we moved here
17 1 personally witnessed the devastation
18 again as the quality of life. What are
18 caused by nature and what havoc forest
19 you as the board going to do to prevent
19 fires wreck upon local neighboring
20 decreasing the quality of life? The
20 communities. Why should we purposely
21 traffic issues that on Route 9 I feel
21 encourage and direct such destruction
22 have already begun to erode that life
22 when we have the power to control it?
23 quality.
23 This is not in nature's hands here
24 Point number three B is: What
24 but our own. Please understand that we
Page110
Page112
1 affect will removal of those trees
1 all have responsibility here, and each
2 between Route 9 and the Northway have?
2 of us needs to accept that, including
3 My guess is that it is going to have
3 myself.
4 significant affect on the noise that we
4 My comments are specific to the
5 experience in our backyard.
5 removal of trees between the Samoset
6 Point number four is on the Alpine
6 Motel and The Coach House Restaurant. I
7 Bobsled. Three years ago my wife, Mary,
7 have a real concern regarding the damage
8 and she was one of the first people to
8 that would occur to not only the
9 call John Collins at the Great Escape
9 aesthetics of this area but to the
10 and complain. At that. point she was
10 watershed after removing a mature stand
i i told that there was only one other.
11 of predominantly white pine between the
12 person who called in and complained that
12 Samoset and The Coach House. These
13 it really wasn't an issue. This was
13 trees provide year-round benefits with
14 three years ago. The Great Escape has
14 respect to air and water quality in
15 had three years to correct that problem.
15 addition to acting as beautiful natural
16 I am questioning what other additional
16 sound barrier. This is just one small
17 problems are we going to see with this
17 aspect of the park's plan that I have
18 expansion that no one has foreseen. If
18 concerns with. We can coexist. But not
19 the Great Escape can't correct one minor
19 as such extremes as what is being
20 problem over a three year time span, how
20 proposed. Watershed quality can not
21 can the citizens of Queensbury expect
21 help but be affected water quality.
22 them to correct problems that you can't
22 What will become of the lake where I
23 see?
23 grew up and still today provides me with
24 Number five, I think we need to
24 so much inner peace, noise and a
3-29
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
rurinc
Condenselt "
Page 113
1
pollution increases from and automotive
2
traffic has to increase. Aesthetics, if
3
nothing else, will be greatly affected
4
in an adverse way.
5
Please, I am truly scared of what
6
is about to happen. This board has a
7
means to do this right. I believe in
8
you. Each one of you. Please don't
9
make me wish that I was wearing a purple
10
ribbon tonight this evening rather than
I
a blue one as though it were in memory
12
of Glen Lake rather than in support of.
13
Thank you so very much for your time.
14
SPEAKER: Paul Derby. My name is
15
Paul Derby. I live at 86 Ash Drive.
16
That's on Glen Lake. I apologize in
17
advance because I am going to be winging
18
it a bit. I have prepared a statement I
19
am going to be chopping. And the reason
20
for that is because I just received some
21
advice from a storm water runoff expert,
22
an opinion, and try to add some of these
23
things in here so I will be putting
24
that.
29, 2000
Page 115
1
with its proposed new development to
2
Park Area C in its analysis needed to do
3
a total storm water management plan.
4
This is important. He suggested that to
5
mitigate this they could still do what
6
the retrofitted storm water Park Area A
7
with minimal analysis. It would take
8
some time. So we ask the board that
9
they require to this suggestion.
10
Second, Park Area C parking lot
11
should not be paved. The suggestion
12
again was that paving the ring roads is
13
probably a good idea to get traffic in,
14
but instead of using pavement on the
15
parks he suggested that technology, and
16
I will just tell you what it is, this is
17
actually from a company called Gravel
1S
Pave Two and the -- I can pass this but
19
1 need it back -- actually was what
20
it is a kind of block that allows the
21
water to pass through. You can then put
22
the blocks down with the storm water
23
management that they want to do, the
24
water will run through. You can put
Page 114
Page 116
1
This leads me to the first issue,
i
dirt on then, and actually put a lawn.
2
the actual of the timing of public
2
This is the Orange Bowl, this picture up
3
comment. This DGEIS took several months
3
here, which they park on the roads
4
to compile and evaluate. It contains a
4
coming in and parking on. I will hand
5
lot of data, complicated texts. It
5
that.
6
needs to be reviewed and analyzed by the
6
MR. CHAIRMAN: I will ask when you
7
public, either of the qualified experts.
7
are done, Mr. Derby, give to the staff.
8
And I ask the board at this time if you
8
SPEAKER: Sure. I will turn in
9
will consider giving the public
9
with written comment.
10
additional time to prepare comment?
10
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
11
Obviously we are not going to get
11
SPEAKER: Okay. And the reason for
12
through all the people that are here
12
this is not only for better storm water
13
tonight. If there is no additional
13
management, which you said it will
14
public hearings granted, will the board
14
happen, it will look better so you have
15
at least allow additional extended time
15
the environmental and aesthetics.
16
for written comment? I propose another
16
As far as the sewage treatment
17
60 days, if possible.
17
plant, the better alternative for that
18
Okay. First I would like to go to
18
would be to run the sewer lines. I know
19
the comment that I received from this
19
political problems but the risk
20
water expert. He didn't have much time
20
potential to Glen Lake, all the
21
to look at the data but these are some
21
watershed is far higher if you put a
22
of his comments. Number one, looking at
22
treatment plant then; than if you had no
23
storm water runoff he said that the park
23
effluent going there. We suggest to ask
24
should have included Park Area A along
24
the board to having further look into
3-30
I
Public Hearing Condenselt11"
August 29, 2000
I
Page 117
this.
Page 119
i
the bike path bridge to the inlet of the
2
Also we haven't referred to the
2
lake, look to the west toward the park
3
Glen Lake Watershed Management Plan,
3
and turn around, look backward, the east
4
which the town board adopted, I believe,
4
to the lake there is no hill. There are
5
6
two years ago. And in that plan it
requires that management within the
5
6
trees but nothing to block that noise.
Well, the distance is for
Ash Drive
7
watershed's use doesn't require but it
7
where I live, Canterbury, Birch,
8
suggests what it called an intermodal,
8
Chestnut, you have noise from the park
9
which is in there for modeling
9
to these locations has a relatively
10
development. That has not been done in
10
clear line of sight. My home on Ash
11
the DGEIS. We suggest that. We ask the
11
Drive to any of whom I have spoken noise
12
board to ask to do the model. Again,
12
from the park particularly from the
13
the Great Escape can run and give them
13
Alpine Bobsled really does exist. I
14
the model. That would help us give a
14
have heard it. My wife's heard it. We
15
better --
15
have called and complained about it over
16
1 am going to skip ahead and look
16
the last three years and they should
17
at noise because noise affects. I live
17
have that on record.
18
on Ash Drive. Let me read from the
18
Further, in addition, in the past
'
19
DGEIS page 3-34, which states, I am
19
my wife and I have attended planning,
20
quoting, "With respect to measured sound
20
Town Planning Board meetings and offered
'
21
22
reading topography is very important.
With reference to Section 4.8 the figure
21
22
space on our property for an audible
noise monitoring site. We can go to the
D
entitled "Line of Sight Profiles," it
23
minutes. I ask the board, will you
24
can be see that the Glen Lake shore
24
compel the applicant to amend this draft
Page118
Page120
1
monitoring point does not have a clear
1
with additional audible noise studies at
2
3
line of sight from the park or major
potential noise source such as the I-87
2
3
property sites on Glen Lake where actual
noise from the park has been noted?
4
corridor. As can be seen from the Glen
4
Again, I offer my property for such a
5
Lake monitoring results, in particular
5
site gladly, because we can hear. It
'
6
even though monitoring point may be
6
was loud today. Now the applicant may
7
physically very close to the park, other
7
argue that the 1999 testing was setup to
8
noise sources such as the hill is very
8
copy the same site at 1990 tests to do a
9
effective in limiting noise
9
comparative data. However there are
10
propagation," end quote.
10
several inadequacies in this argument.
11
However, regarding where the '
11
Number one, the 1999 study added an
12
monitor site was placed it was placed at
12
additional monitoring site with the park
'
13
Birdsall, already been mentioned, behind
13
to get more and better data. Why wasn't
14
a hill that is there. As Don Milne
14
or couldn't additional monitoring sites
15
said, there has been no noise complaint
15
be placed on Glen Lake to get more and
16
from that area. The selected place was
16
better data? They could be and they
17
inadequate. However, a topography map
17
should be.
18
will show that although a hill blocks
18
I will skip ahead. This is very
19
this small area, those six or seven
19
important. The applicant did not follow
20
households there is clear auditory line
20
its own plan as stated in the scoping
'
21
22
of sight that does exist from the inlet
bay of the lake immediately to the north
21
22
document, which states that, and I
quote, the noise levels to be produced
23
of their chosen monitor site. This is
23
by the park within the adjacent DGEis
24
obvious enough if one were to stand upon
24
study area has resulted in a cumulative
3-31
0
U
U
Public Hearing
CondenseIt7"
August 29, 2000
1
Page 121
impact such as increase traffic, loud 1
Page 123
option for additional powers granted.
2
speaker, more rides if any of park
2
Will the board walk this proposed line
3
attendance shall be modeled using data
3
along Ash Drive and Glen Lake Road to
4
5
gathered by the consultant. Such
modeling shall consider the affect of
4
observe the impact that it will have on
6
how properties across Glen Lake that may
5
6
our community?
Further as an alternative
7
8
be affected by noise carrying over,
water. Page 4 scoping documents, ladies
7
mitigating measure will the board and
9
and gentlemen, not a single study nor
8
9
applicant consider burying these
electrical lines. And as they state
10
noise impact affect was regarding noise
10
they do it for functional and for
11
12
carrying over water. Why not? Again,
the applicant failed to follow some
11
aesthetics reasons. For the same
13
instructions. Will this board make the
12
reasons these alternatives ought to be
14
applicant go back and fulfill the
13
considered on our public roads. They
15
condition of its own scoping document?
14
15
say it will be cost prohibitive. I
think the money is there and may solve
16
The applicant also makes the bold
16
that problem.
17
18
conclusion on page 42 of the DGEIS to
the causal relationship between the
17
I wish to thank the board. I don't
19
Royal and visitor attendance to
18
19
envy your task. This is important
decision. All I ask that you weigh the
20
corresponding levels as contemplated by
20
options and be fair minded. We
21
the proposed project in the increase in
21
appreciate it. Thank you very much.
22
audible and the recepting neighborhoods,
22
MS. LaBOMBARD: Lorraine Stein.
23
end quote. This at the same time I know
23
SPEAKER: Hi. My name is Lorraine
24
is incorrect. I hear it and I ask the
24
Stein, and in the interest of time most
Page 122
1 board to reject the conclusion giving
Page 124
I of the -- most of the items I was going
2 testimony from the many people incurred
2 to address have already been addressed
3 here this evening.
3 so I am not going to get into what I was
4 Finally I would like to address a
4 going to originally say. I just
5 quick point that has been -- this
5 wanted to make two comments. I also
6 concerns Ash Drive and Glen Lake Road
6 agree that we have not had enough time
7 resident that is part of the electricity
7 to review the document based on the fact
8 project. The park claims it will be
8 of the size of the document and
9 additional electrical service for the
9 technical data that is incorporated in
10 proposed expansion project. The first
10 it, so I also request that the board
i l option for additional electricity is run
I allow more time to review it. And I
12 higher 50 foot electricity and thicker
12 also want to just to remind the board
13 power lines along Ash Drive. It is Ash
13 that before you make your final
14 Drive, not road, and Glen Lake Road.
14 decisions that if approved, all these
15 See Section 2 and Tof the DGEis. This
15 impacts caused by the expansion project
16 Environmental Impact Statement claims
16 will be irreversible. I want you to
17 such a change is within the current
17 weigh that heavily when you make your
18 visual character of the area. However,
1s decision. Thank you.
19 closer look at that proposed path this
19 MS. LaBOMBARD: Bernard Watkins.
20 action will require and many existing
20 SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman, members of
21 trees or cutting back of many, many
21 the board, I want to thank you for the
22 branches along Ash Drive and Glen Lake
22 opportunity you provided this evening.
23
Road. This certainly will radically
23 1 am a 30 year summer resident of Glen
24
alter which I find unacceptable for this
24 Lake. My children have grown up here.
3-32
�l
Public Hearing
Page
CondenseItT"`
125
August 29, 2000
1
Many of them worked at the Great Escape
1
Page 127
study is done or what kind of
2
or Story Town as it was known then. But
2
recommendations are made.
3
I have a great concern about what is
3
I think that --
'6
4
happening to this area: And I feel that
4
(Applause.)
5
the effort that is being made by the
5
1 think that the work that has been
'
6
Great Escape is not surprising since
6
done by this community in promoting the
7
they are in business. And if I were
7
wonder of this area, and if you look
8
them, I would try to propose something
8
around and a 200 foot ride, and then you
9
that would give me as much flexibility
9
look around at the mountains that are
10
as I could have. So I have no great
10
around us and how we kind of commingle
11
quarrel with what they did, but I think
11
those ideas, it is very difficult for me
'
12
our responsibility and specifically
12
to understand. I want the Great Escape
13
yours is to make sure that we don't
13
to remain. I think it has been great
14
create a monster, which in effect will
14
for this area. But I don't think it
'
15
16
take that little postage stamp of land
and devour it. It's really a very small
15
16
should be allowed to expand as it is
being
proposed here. I don't think the
17
area that we are talking about, and we
17
environment can handle it. I don't
18
are talking about convening thousands
18
think it is good for this community. 1
19
and thousands of people in that one
19
respectfully ask that the board
20
spot, and we are talking about impacting
20
seriously considers reducing the
21
the lives of people who live here
21
expectations that has been established
I
22
year-round and who are here for the
22
by the Great Escape, give them an
23
summer months.
23
opportunity to some of the things that
24
So I would ask you to carefully
24
have been to help them promote the
1
Page126
think about -- and I am sure that you
1
Page128
business, but not to devastate this
2
will -- what is going to happen. I
2
area. Thank you.
3
would ask you to propose perhaps to the
3
MS. LaBOMBARD: Dale Nemer is next,
4
people from Great Escape that some sort
4
and Mary Ann McNeil and Max J. Yurenda.
5
of a time line, which I did not see
5
SPEAKER: Hi. Thank you for this
6
included here. It may not have been
6
opportunity to comment. Noise is our
7
necessary as part of their proposal, but
7
family's number one concern. Frankly
8
what would go on line and when if they
8
day to day the screams and other related
9
were going to put in the sewage
9
noise admitted from the park are
10
treatment center when that would in
10
tolerable but the racket provided by the
11
effect come on line, when woul&the
11
Bobsled ride is deafening and disturbing.
12
traffic be expanded, and what sort of
12
both from our yard, in our home, and
13
controls would the town board have after
13
when we are on the golf course at the
14
they began to incrementally allow this
14
local country club.
15
16
expansion, if they were to say that if
these conditions were met, and step two
15
16
I am aware that modifications were
made to the machine. However,
there is
17
can be taken if those conditions are
17
no perceptible decrease in the noise.
18
19
met, then step three can be undertaken.
But I think to -- I cannot imagine how
18
19
The vast difference in noise pollution
between the time the ride runs does
20
you could safeguard all of the concerns
20
and
not run is enormous.
21
that have been expressed here tonight by
21
Question: What strides has the
22
giving some sort of a blanket approval
22 -
town made in developing and implementing
23
at this time. I just don't think it
23
a noise ordinance to preserve the
24
would be possible no matter how much
24
character of our area?
3-33
Public Hearing
Condenselt' August 29, 2000
1
Question: Has the town considered
Page 129
1
Mountain, the bike path will be Page131
2
an ordinance to restrict the volume of
2
negatively affected. Also, cement
3
4
noise at certain hours; i.e, seven or
eight p.m, bedtime hours for children
3
parking lot cause heat problems and
5
and some oldsters too? I am curious if
4
5
storm water runoff.
Question: Have these issues been
6
the Great Escape has considered moving
6
addressed by the Planning Board?
7
8
toward virtual reality ride that are
being added at other theme parks and
7
Another question: Where is the
9
indoor thrill experience. Obviously
8
9
spoil from the clear-cut going? p g b This is
not clear from the report.
10
11
easier on neighbors' ears and less
vulnerable to rainy summer days.
10
Traffic is a big concern and it
12
Question: Has the town examined
11
became an even bigger concern this past
13
the proposed new ride slated to be built
12
13
two years when we were teaching our two
daughters to drive. It is virtually
14
near the perimeter of the park?
14
impossible to make a left-hand turn out
15
Question: Has the town considered
15
of Montray, Round Pound and Kendrick
16
17
requiring cement or concrete barrier
walls to protect the environment against
16
17
Roads between four and six -thirty p.m.
18
noise, such as Bush Gardens, Universal
18
Hence people are driving circuitous
routes to avoid the snarl.
19
Studios and Knoxber Farm. They have
19
Question: Has the Town Planning
20
moved in this direction to address.
20
Board considered the secondary impact
21
Speaking of noise, we are concerned
21
and ripple affect of traffic and
22
as to the potential increase in traffic
22
secondary roads, including the
23
noise from the Adirondack Northway as a
23
aforementioned roads as well as Haviland
24
result of the proposed enlarged parking
24
Road, the Orchard Park area, Route 149
l
Page 130
lot and the cutting down of land and
1
Page 132
and Bay Road?
2
trees, the natural buffer on the land
2
Question: Speaking of secondary
3
adjacent to the Northway. It appears
3
affect specifically how have local fire,
4
that there is sufficient parking
4
rescue, police and ambulance services
5
available now as many spots seem to go
5
responded to the report?
6
unused each day.
6
The character of our area from pine
7
Question: Has the Town Planning
7
scented pillows, to the faint Adirondack
8
Board adequately examined the impact of
8
chair, to the world famous photo of
9
the proposed expanded lots in terms of
9
Nathan Farb, to Adirondack Magazine, all
10
the heavily wooded buffer outlined in
10
of these boast of our home area's
I
the town master plan neighborhood -seven,
11
natural and serene beauty.
12
page 8, the proposed buffer will not
12
We are indeed a tourist mecca. I
13
protect neighbors from Northway noise.
13
venture to say and I hope that more
14
Instead of what is in effect
14
people travel to our region to enjoy and
15
clear -cutting of the land on the west
15
partake in the natural outdoors than an
16
side of Route 9, has the town considered
16
amusement park. However, there is room
17
the creation of a parking garage?
17
for both. Although let us not forget
18
In addition from my reading of the
18
what was here first. It is my family's
19
report it appears that few islands of
19
great hope that the Great Escape
20
trees and bushes are being built to
20
corporation does not affect what was
21
replace the cut trees. No doubt the
21
here first, and the corporation will in
22
character of the area both in terms of
22
all of their expansion plans respect the
23
driving on Route 9 and from a variety of
23
quality of the local air, noise, water
24
visual vantage point, i.e. Prospect
24
and vistas from public and private
- 3-34
Public Hearing Condenseit"`
Page 133
August 29, 2000
i
areas. From what I have read, with some
i
Page 135
MR. CHAIR1vLAN: Nice and loud.
2
3
creativity the Great Escape and the
designers and planners can add rides and
2
SPEAKER: okay. Mr. Chairman, and
4
additions sensitive to local ears and
3
4
members of the board. Well, this
5
the environment. And in other`words,
5
morning I knew it was nine o'clock
because I heard the roar of the Alpine
6
not as loud as the Bobsled. I certainly
6
Bobsled. I say, well, I have two
7
wish I had had sufficient time and.
7
choices; I can close my window and put
8
expertise to read and synthetize the
8
the fan on. That's not why I live at
9
10
report. An extension of time is in
order as summer finds many of us not at
9
Glen Lake. I want to hear and I want to
10
see the birds and everything else that
11
home. I request an extension, maybe
I
the Alpine Bobsled drowns it out. Then
12
three months.
12
I say now my day will be go off telling
'
13
Thank you for your attention. But
13
the roar of a jet, that's how I would
14
1 have a procedural question. We have
14
equate the Alpine Bobsled, then silence,
15
16
all asked many questions tonight. When
do
15
and the roar of the jet again. This
we get the answers? Who answers our
16
will go on all day long unless I want to
17
questions? Specifically when? Is it in
17
sit in the house with everything closed
'
18
19
writing?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mark or Chris?
18
19
up. Heaven forbid I should go out on my
screen porch or go down on the dock, it
20
MR. SCHACHNER: Answer to the
20
will be magnified even more.
21
question, Ms. Nemer, is that this step
21
Now to me this would be a
22
tonight at the public hearing is one
22
significant impact. They don't seem to
23
step in the process under the law called
23
think it is, but I think it is. And
24
the New York State Environmental Review
24
when what I just heard now that it has
i
Page 134
Act or SEQRA. After the close of the
1
Page 136
been three years since people have been
2
public comment, we believe which is
2
complaining about the noise from the
3
September 12th, written comments can be
3
Alpine Bobsled. I want the board to see
4
received, it will be incumbent on the
4
if there are any other Bobsleds in the
5
applicant first with the assistance of
5
country or somewhere else that are
'
6
7
the plan of the town's consultant to
prepare a draft of a new document called
6
7
quieter. Maybe this Alpine Bobsled is
incapable
of making a quiet noise. Of
8
a Final Environmental Impact Statement.
8
course, that is a contradiction so I
9
One of the principal components of that
9
think I would like to have them do that.
10
document will be a section called
10
And I really feel sorry for people who
i i
"Responses to Comment on the Draft
11
have children because we all know that
12
Environmental Impact Statement." At
12
extra loud noise over a long period of
13
that time, it will be up to the Planning
13
time is damaging to your hearing.
14
Board, which is SEQRA lead agency, to
14
And as far as the traffic when 1
15
decide whether it believes the entire
15
sit on my porch at night and it is very
16
Draft Environmental Impact Statement,
16
quiet, I can hear the traffic from the
17
including the responses to comment are
17
Northway now. If they are going to
18
appropriate. This will be a process
18
remove all the trees and all the hills
19
that will evolve over a period of
19
and everything that goes with it, it's
20
probably several months.
20
going to be a lot larger. As the woman
21
SPEAKER: Thank you.
21
previously stated, if you care to out
22
MS. LaBOMBARD: Mary Ann McNeil.
22
go
on Route 9, maybe between four and six,
23
SPEAKEk: Mr. Chairman, and members
23
forget it, you can't get on Route 9.
24
of the board.
24
Not only do people block the road from
n___- A1_--- �---'.`Y►----`--i�+n\ Sri nis•
3-35
1
1
1
11
ruD11C Hearing
Condenselt"
August 29, 2000
1
Page137
Glen Lake on to Route 9, they won't let
1
Page139
fishing line to the very end and get a
2
you out. So now our whole family has
2
lure off the end of it. That's what I
3
been forced to go over Glen Lake Road,
3
remember.
4
out to Bay Road. And we call it going
4
Since then, increased noise. Our
5
the back way.
5
environment has changed drastically in
6
So strangers have come, they have
6
terms of that Bobsled ride. I have seen
7
changed our life and no one is doing
7
filling in of the wetland. I have seen
8
anything about it. And my problem is if
8
clear -cutting of trees along the wetland
9
they can't correct the problems that
9
especially between the Trading Post and
10
exist now, I can not believe you are
10
the Great Escape. I have seen a drastic
11
going to sit here and let them create
11
change in the water quality. Don't try
12
more problems for us.
12
snorkling. You can't see anything
13
(Applause.)
13
anymore.
14
And I also hope the board is aware
14
Now I am hearing you say now I see
15
that Six Flags now is in the red. They
15
parking along the wetland where parking
16
are not making money. They have been
16
lots proposed that it would never
17
losing money. I hope they don't get the
17
happen. They park in there. I see an
18
plan with the sewage half built and then
18
increased dumping of runoff water into
19
say to us, "Well, if you don't want us
19
the lake. I am now hearing about a
20
to ruin your air and your water, you
20
proposed sewage treatment plant which
21
better give us some taxpayer money so
21
brings more phosphorus in the lake
22
that we can finish that." I hope that
22
leading to algae blooms. And increased
23
agreement is put in there that you get
23
proposal of noise with a 200 foot roller
24
100 percent money from them not asking
24
coaster designed to make people scream.
Page 138
Page 140
i
the taxpayers to do it.
1
And increased clearcutting of what is
2
Thank you very much for your
2
left of the trees around this park and
3
patience.
3
an increase offensive change in the
4
MS. LaBOMBARD: Max Yurenda,
4
visual environment of our neighborhood.
5
please, and Linda Whitty. Linda Whitty,
5
These are just a few of my many
6
please.
6
concerns.
7
SPEAKER: My name is Linda Clark
7
What does Premiere Parks want?
8
Whitty. I have lived on Glen Lake for
8
They want Six Flags in our neighborhood.
9
30 years. Before I begin, might I say
9
Six Flags parks around this country are
10
that 45 speakers with an estimate of ten
10
surrounded by many acres of land buffing
11
minutes each, that to me is seven' -and a
11
the noise between the park and
12
half hours of listening. That's not
12
surrounding neighborhoods. That does
13
reasonable or fair to anyone in this
13
not exist in this case. Bottom line,
14
room or even to you. I am a speaker
14
Six Flags park does not comfortably fit
15
number 23, by the way.
15
into this neighborhood. I am reminded
16
Now I remember Story Town. Simple,
16
now of the song something like, "All you
17
simple, sweet little park. Wetland we
17
need to know, you don't know what you
18
call the swamp when we were kids. We
18
have got until it's gone, they paved
19
used to go back in there with our canoe.
19
paradise and put up a parking lot."
20
We could go as far as Jungle Land and
20
Thank you.
21
actually see the people walking over the
21
SPEAKER: Members of the board, my
22
little bridges in Jungle Land. We could
22
name is Andrew Patenaude, W. W. —
23
snorkle at Glen Lake and we could find a
23
members of the board, my name is Andrew
24
clear fishing line or follow that
24
Patenaude, W. W. Patenaude Sons. I
3-36
1
1
1
1
Public
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
21
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
1
23
T____ _
CondenseIt"
Page 141
represent a company who does a lot of
work for the Great Escape. We love to
see them expand and bring more events to
our areas so that we can do work for
them. They are a great corporate
neighbor. Excellent company to work
for.
I think one thing that people
forget in this auditorium is that
everybody has to work somewhere. We are
constantly looking for new industry, new
places for new jobs. How can we bring
somebody into our area? Well you are
looking at them right here behind me.
Most of the commerce that takes place in
the Town of Queensbury is from people
traveling, coming someplace to look at
something, to go to an amusement park,
to see Lake George, to go on the Mini Ha
Ha, the way that the Great Escape can
keep people coming to see them is by
putting new events and new rides, new
shows in, different things to not just
to bring travelers from long distances
Page 142
but to keep people interested that are
in their own neighborhood.
The other thing I want to touch on
is that I heard a lot of people say
that, "Well, my kids worked there and
they are good, a good place for my kids
to work," or whatnot, but it's not just
kid jobs. It's not just summer jobs.
It is many full-time jobs. Not. to
mention construction jobs. There is a
lot of construction workers in our area
who need more places to work. I am sure
that most of the problems that people in
this room tonight had with their plan
can be resolved, water can be treated
and it can be made clean, sound problems
can be reduced, the trees that they are
worried about for parking lots,
landscaping can be done, more trees can
be planted only in different areas. And
may I add that it is construction
workers that would do all those things.
Obviously, obviously, I am a little one
sided on this because we enjoy all the
3-37
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
23
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
24
August 29, 2000
Page 143
work that the Great Escape provides for
us, and it's not during just the hours
that the park is open or months that the
park is open, it is in the off season
times.
This year alone I probably had
our -- had 20 to 25 people working at
the Great Escape for three months. All
high paying construction jobs. It is
hard to find those things in the
northeast. And you certainly don't want
to lose the opportunities when you have
them. So I think that through a little
bit of work on the Great Escape side and
a little bit of work on the Town of
Queensbury side, we could come to a
resolution and figure out a way to go
forward on this, and I hope that
happens. Thank you.
MS. LaBOMBARD: Robert Tompkins.
Herb Levin.
SPEAKER: My name is Herb Levin, I
live on Birch Road on the shore of Glen
Lake. I would like to thank the board
Page 144
for their time and for allowing me to
get up and stretch. I would be more
than happy incidentally to give up a
minute of my time so everyone can get up
and stretch if it's okay with you guys.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Continue on. We are
ready to go there.
SPEAKER: I tried.
When Mr. Wood purchased the site
and began developing the park the word
"ecology" was not yet coined. Wetland
and environmental concerns were minimal.
Filling in the swamp was a way to make
use of this site. Now we all know
better. We know environmental damage to
sensitive areas is wrong, yet here we
are tonight deciding not only will we
accept the previous ecological, but very
likely to plant expansion and increased
use, I would expect a further decline of
our environment.
Let's look at the current activity
of the park owners. Let's consider the
current record. I am concerned that the
Public Hearing
CondenseItl"I'
August 2 ,2000
Page 145 -- --
1
park owners have done nothing to isolate
1
Page 147
consultants and experts, but sadly it
2
3
current parking from critical wetland
currently autos and other vehicles are
2
wouldn't surprise me. If allowed, the
4
allowed to park and possibility lead
3
4
proposed development will cause further
5
toxins right into the banks of wetlands.
contamination of the lake and our
6
This is allowed despite currently
5
6
neighborhoods. Thank you.
7
adequate parking. An expanded water
P
7
SPEAKER: Good evening. y
o M name is
Lorrie Graves from Ash Drive on Glen
8
park rests right on top of the aquifer,
8
Lake. I am not an environmental
9
the fen. I would assume that such water
9
engineer but I do know what I hear, and
10
parks use chemically treated water, and
10
I do hear the noise. I do know what I
I
chemically treated water drains right
11
will see if they do put a 200 foot
12
13
into the soils of the wetland. I am
concerned that no attempt has been made
12
roller coaster in. And along with being
13
able to see that, I will also be able to
14
to correct previous encroachments and
14
hear that. I don't -- I don't want to
15
these environmental areas are allowed to
15
be able to go out to my front yard, sit
16
17
remain.
I offer suggestions to the town
16
on my dock and have to look at a roller
18
planners. Require greater and increase
17
18
coaster as I look toward the inlet of
the lake. I don't go along with the
19
buffers between the watershed and all
19
clear -cutting of all the trees. The
—_
20
21
aspects of the development, especially
parking. I urge lower impact parking
20
21
association has worked very hard on the
22
systems similar to the Bronx Zoo, leave
22
storm water management to protect the
lake and it does encompass large
23
the trees, park between them. Don't
23
a very
area in the Town of Queensbury,
24
clear-cut. Don't pave the area. If
24
clear -cutting these trees is detrimentalin
1
expansion is approved, please require Page 146
1
to that. Page 148
2
the correction of previous environmental
2
1 have a problem with the traffic
3
mistakes. For instance, require the
3
on Route 9. As one lady mentioned,
4
removal of the recycled asphalt layer
4
turning around on Glen Lake Road and
5
dumped in the sand pit north of the
5
heading back out toward Bay Road, going
6
park. Incidentally, this area slopes
6
the back way is almost the only option
7
and drains into the wetland. It should
7
that you have to come out of Glen Lake
8
not be allowed to remain. Please
8
Road and take a left turn. It's just
9
10
require this, this return and all other
environmental mistakes to be changed to
9
not possible. The people won't stop and
10
let you go out. So you either have to
l i
ecological well being. I ask you to-:
11
take a right-hand turn, go into the
12
13
please limit the height and the sound
approximately of all rides and all
12
13
county center, go in, turn around and
hit the light
to make a left-hand turn.
14
future rides.
14
It is not fair to the people to have to
15
Last night I was walking my dog.
15
do this.
16
Actually it was early evening. I
16
I don't agree with them paving the
17
listened to a symphony on crickets and
17
parking lot. There has to be other
18
frogs along with a slight hum of
18
alternatives to this. There needs to be
19
Northway traffic. All of a sudden I was
19
drainage there and there are other ways
20
very nervous of the thought that future
20
that that can be accomplished. The
21
strolls would be updated by the scream
21
board has to scrutinize the plans that
22
of the roller coaster ride as it crests
22
the Great Escape has. I am not against
23
the peak of giant. That thought seared
23
the Great Escape. I went to Story Town
24
me. I wish I could believe all the
24
when I was a little girl. I have gone
-
-
3-38
_,
Public Hearing
CondenseIt'�`
August 29, 2000
Page 149
1
to the Great Escape as an adult and had
1
nutrient runoff? Page 151
2
3
a lot of fun. They are a business and I
realize that. We are not saying that
2
It doesn't take an engineer to know
4
5
they can't expand. But it has to be
3
4
common sense things. Much of what is in
this draft seems not complete -or
6
scrutinized and controlled. Thank you.
MS. LaBOMBARD: Diane Hayes.
5
not
completely thought through. More time
7
SPEAKER: Hi. I am Diane Hayes. 1
6
7
is necessary for the review of this huge
document. Our area must remain
8
9
10
grew up on Glen Lake. I spent my first
25 years there. Just like Linda Whitty,
8
9
preserved. Lets find the right way to
have those fun rides and attract
we used to take our small boat and go up
10
tourists without doing harm. We,
11
12
the creek all the way up to Animal Land,
and I might have been one of those
11
the
public, are relying on you to find the
-
13
people you saw going over the hill. We
12
13
right way to proceed with this
14
used to swim right near Route 9. There
14
expansion.
I would like to recommend an
'
15
16
was a very large, cold pool of water
where we used to swim right off the
15
extension for comment, both verbal and
17
boat, just the small boat. And, you
16
17
written, for 30 or 60 more days.
Thank you.
18
19
know, what is there now? It is a
parking lot. And ever since they put
I8
MS. LaBOMBARD: Virginia Etu;
20
that sand in on the east side of Route 9
19
20
please.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Next speaker. '
21
22
that was when you began not to be able
to see with your snorkle and you
y
21
MS. LaBOMBARD: Robert Hu a And
23
couldn't dive for coins when your
22
after Robert Hughes, Michael J. O'Connor
24
relatives would come and visit and throw
23
24
and Karen Sabo.
SPEAKER: Hi. I'm Robert Hughes.
I
Page 150
coins down. But nobody knew, nobody
1
Page 152
I should mention a conflict of interest.
2
knew then that by putting that sand
2
I own property on Glen Lake and 1
3
4
there they were going to have a drastic
affect on the lake. But we know now and
3
have been a life long summer resident
5
you guys have to protect us because this
4
5
for my entire 44 years, and I too would
like to just support most of the
6
7
is this impact study has very many
faults with that.
6
7
comments. That lake has changed a lot
I don't
8
I just have a couple of other
8
and think it has been for the
better. I see a lot of suits are being
9
10
things. Concerning the rides, I really
like for the rides to be below the tree
9
paid to sit here, but I also see an
10
awful lot of people who are here at
11
line: -And when you guys talked about
11
there own expense and personal
12
having extra power lines and putting in
12
sacrifice.
13
14
taller and larger poles along the Glen
Lake Road, and I am assuming along the
13
14
I think important one to remember
IS
bike path, that is just a beautiful area
15
one this exploitation, this type of
industry is big business, it ends
16
there and it would really destroy the
16
up
becoming a large drain on the community.
17
whole look of, to say nothing of looking
17
It really does not bring money into the.
18
19
across toward West Mountain and seeing
nothing but a ride sticking up. I think
18
community. It takes it out. That money
20
removal of the trees from the Animal
19
20
no longer recirculates in the community
and therefore becomes a major drain.
21
Land and the Samoset Motel area is just
21
That is just basic economics.
22
plain wrong. How can anyone think
22
You know, I think there is other
23
removal of these trees will not have an
23
issues. I think the fact to have that
24
impact on noise or erosion or the
24
Bobsled ride shows a total lack of.
Al-
-
3-39
l _ .
Public Hearing CondenseIt" `
August 29, 2000
Page 153
I sensitivity and lack of concern for the 1 gone over that base, we don't need to go Paoe 155
2 neighbors and the neighborhood and this
3 community as a whole. That ride does 2 back to it. I think in fairness to the
4 sound like thunder on Glen Lake. Also 3 applicant that should be set forth as
3 fee] that their example of not bein 4 Well as to those of us that have
g 5 concerns.
i 6 willing to tie in or contribute to the 6 1 also thank the applicant for its
7 sewer system proves that lack of 7 efforts to date and say I do not oppose
8 community orientation. 8 the Great Escape. I think they as
9 As for environmental concerns, I 9 owners of a business have rights. It is
10 reiterate many of the fears the people 10 a matter of balancing their rights and
1 I have voiced about the sense pollutions I 1 those that they will affect by their
12 that have been going on here. As an 12 proposed expansion. I think that can be
13 otolaryngologist, I warn you all the 13 done. I think that they have a very
14 auditory pollution can be vastly more 14 positive impact on the community,
15 damaging than visual pollution. You IS
16 must continue to enforce visual, height particularly economically, and I think
gh 16 that a partnership can be worked out so
17 and sound restrictions. I really don't 17 that everybody can coexist.
18 think we need this kind of growth here. 18
I have spoken only briefly to some
19 Thank you. 19 of the representatives of the applicant
20 SPEAKER: Good evening. I am Mike 20 and I thank them for being open with me,
21 O'Connor. I reside at 546 Glen Street. 21 and I might suggest that they stipulate
22 I also have a year-round home on Glen 22 to a further written response time to
23 Lake. I have been a resident of Glen 23 allow everybody the opportunity to make
24 Lake, either part time or year-round 24 the examination and consult with experts
Page 154 Page 156
I basis since 1953. 1 would like to thank 1 if they think it is their interest to do
2 the board for persisting that the Great 2 so. And I think that would ease a lot
3 Escape file this DGEIs. I think the 3 of the concerns that are out here that
4 board took the right approach in 4 it took a year to put this document
5 requiring the applicant to do as 5 together, and this is certainly probably
6 opposed to looking at what they have 6 not the first draft of the document and
7 been doing or going to do on a part 7 everybody is being asked to respond to
8 time or piecemeal basis applications 8 it in a very short time period.
9 come in. 9 I do have concerns though which I
' 10 I am a little confused. Maybe the 10 would like to have part of the record,
I 1 board will some time either formally or I 1 and my main concern is proposed package
12 informally explain to us what approval 12 plant for sewage. I just don't like
13 of the final draft will mean, because 1 13 package plants. I am not an engineer
14 don't understand that there is an actual 14 and don't pretend to be an engineer and
15 application before the board at this 15 never have on any project I have worked.
16 time unless this is to be considered an 16 I do remember the village of the Lake
17 application, and 1 don't think that's 17 George values of the package plant
18 true. I am wondering what level of 18 values, of the Bolton package plant and
' 19 review will be required in the future 19 even I think Bayberry townhouses, which
20 when they get more specific as to what 20 are now screaming to hook up to city
21 they propose. And that should be 21 sewers because what was then state of
22 spelled out in any resolution or 22 the art, what is then going to work,
23 acceptance of this so that there is not 23 what is not now working.
24 a question later that we have already 24 1 think that probably what is
-Peorov AIP.-ry - rnlirt RPnllr pP !qt Rl A`CA-rk w
3-40
Public Hearing
CondenseItT"
Page 157
August 29, 2000
1
2
proposed is an improvement over the
present septic system that are there
1
Page 159
do the same and I speak only as an
3
about in different places and serve
2
individual, should contact the town
4
different portions of the present
3
supervisor and the town board, the mayor
5
operation. But I still think that what
4
and the common council for the city and
tell them to get together and
6
7
is proposed at least in my mind as a
layman in that area is Band -aid
6
resolve
the problems with the sewer cooperation
8
approach. I think the Great Escape
7
8
so that this is a real possibility and
it becomes an alternative. I
9
should be required to hook up to the
9
think if
the Great Escape is hooking its sewer
10
11
Glens Falls sewer system.
I think if you go back a little bit
10
into the city of Glens Falls, that alone
12
when Wal-Mart came into town, they paid
11
12
is a great advantage that they are
offering to all the residents on Glen
13
14
for the line extension which now goes up
13
Lake. It will void what will happen
15
to as far as Gambles or across the
street from Gambles. They paid for the
14
when the present septic systems aren't
16
one time sign up fee for the city of
15
16
working as well now but they are working
but it will avoid the issues in the
17
18
Glens Falls, and the applicant didn't
include every property owner from the
17
future. That should be a fairly decent
19
point of extension to the end of the
18
19
trade off.
I also have a concern though if
20
line. What they did is they made whole
20
they come back and say they are not
21
22
every property owner. Some people
said -- some people on Route 9 don't
21
going to do that, even the location of
23
want to be included in the registry.
22
23
the present package plant that they
24
They took an easement for people, made
24
propose. Why are they putting it so
close to the wetland? Why don't they
1
Page 158
it optional whether people would be 1
Page 160
put it on the west side of Route 9
2
3
included in the text or not included,
but they did allow a stub for everybody.
2
either on the north end of the property
4
In fact, they paid for everybody's
3
4
or the south end of the property. Get
it as far as away from the wetlands.
5
expenses. They paid for expenses of
5
The will et a sPDES
g Permit for the
6
P�
Mr. Wood, who owned two pieces of
6
e
State of New York. That SPDES permit
7
property, which he chose initially not
7
will require that they look into any
8
to be in the first extension of the
8
municipal sewer that is then available.
9
sewage district, but they paid for out
9
Why don't you put it in a position where
10
of his pocket of expenses a portion of
10
it is more likely to be hooked up to and
11
that.Wal-Mart. I think the town board
11
less likely for the city and the town to
12
and the city need to get this together
12
pay the expenses to hook up to it? If I
13
to make this possible. I understand the
13
understand that where it is located
14
concerns have been made about town. I
14
it is probably there because of gravity
15
also heard and saw in the DBIS in the
15
but if they installed their own pumping
16
draft before you they believe they have
16
system and pumped it up to where Animal
17
enough sewer capacity to operate almost
17
Land was, it's much more likely to be
18
to the point of the full extension.
18
hooked into by the city and town than
19
There doesn't seem any rush to run to
19
where it is presently located. You also
20
the package plant. There is no need to
20
avoid the risk of some outflow into the
21
do it immediately. I think they should
21
wetland.
22
allow the time to fully explore this
22
My second concern is visual impacts
23
24
possibility.
I think everybody here, and I will
23
24
of the project. I have argued often on
behalf of people who want to construct
PPaav AlpYxr _ !'. f ID--4— /CI 01 4<dC_0c7 A
3-41
1
Public Hearing CondenseltTM
Page 161
1 single family homes on Glen Lake because
1
2 of our present requirement that you
2
3 can't build a single family home on
3
4 there in excess of 28 feet in height. I
4
5 don't understand how that gets compared
5
6 at all to what is being proposed here.
6
7 And this is my question as to what is
7
8 the approval if this is approved. The
8
9 best you could tell from the visual
9
10 photographs that's a six foot balloon,
10
I i maybe a four foot balloon or two foot
11
12 balloon at a 200 foot height. But are
12
13 they talking about having a sub
13
14 structure underneath, are they talking
14
15 about one a hundred feet long, 20 feet
15
16 long, talking about a peak, or what are
16
17 you talking about? I don't think you
17
18 can make an intelligent decision as to
18
19 what is being proposed or what the
19
20 visual impact of it is all based on what
20
21 you have in the document before you. I
21
22 also understand that the photographs
22
23 before you have not been touched up, if
23
24
you will, by computer as to what affect
24
Page1621
removal of existing vegetation will have 1
on it. What you have is just present 2
photos. They don't take into effect 3
future clearing of the vegetation that 4
is shown in the photos. And you can do 5
that by computer generation, you can do 6
it by a three angle point of view, and 7
you can tell very practically what in 8
the future you would see from something 9
being constructed when you cleared out 10
the -land underneath to build this 200 11
foot. Okay? 12
I also don't have receptors from 13
points that I think are important. 14
There are two view sheds that I am 15
concerned about. One is from the patio 16
of the Glens Falls Country Club or the 17
first tee of the Glens Falls Country 18
Club, or out in the lake or down by the 19
island on the lake. They have nothing
there.
Lastly, I am concerned about sheet
drainage. I applaud the effort.
Apparently they are going to put some
De...... A7,./ __ 71___ its % iri .. .
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
15
16
17
18
19
22
21
22
3-42
August 29, 2000
fill in finally in the parking lot just . Page 163
below the restaurant. I wonder though
if they are how they are pitching it.
When I asked a couple questions briefly
in the hall, I was told that some of
these things hadn't been engineered yet.
Again, I wonder what is the extent you
are approving as a Generic Draft
Environmental Impact Statement as
opposed to a project Environmental
Impact Statement. Thank you for your
time and thank you for your efforts.
MS. LaBOMBARD: Karen Sabo.
SPEAKER: Hi. I am Karen Sabo. I
live on Twicwood Lane. I want to
thank you for the opportunity to express
my views. Many of my concerns_ are ones
that have already been mentioned, but I
do want to say that I am very concerned
over the increase in the noise coming
from the Great Escape over the past two
Years. Between the Comet, the Alpine
Bobsled, special events and the daily
Elvis impersonator, my neighborhood has
Page 164
been involuntarily bombarded with noise.
I also want to say I am very
concerned when I read the DGEIS that it
included the acoustical from their
study, it concluded that the acoustical
environment and the background noise
levels have not significantly changed
over the past decade. I think the DGEIS
should, should realistically acknowledge
there is current noise problem and the
strong potential for more noise,
negative impact from the 200 foot roller
coaster that is proposed, I think the
DGEIS should include sound studies and
proposals and involving sound walls and
other measures that they should be
taking to address this issue, but it
doesn't.
Also, the overwhelming noise heard
by the neighbors from the concert and
the special events from the Great Escape
was not studied in the DGEIS. All that
was mentioned was concert noise was not
a problem, and anyone's windows who
Is
n
Public
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
CondenseItn"
Page 165
shook during the Christian rock concert
last year and hearing jail house rock
all the time can tell you that it is a
problem.
The other really, really, really
big concern I have is the extensive
removal of trees on the west side of
Route 9. And as Dale mentioned earlier,
it is in direct conflict with the Town
of Queensbury, Town of Queensbury
adopted master plan, which recommends
that the west side of Route 9, quote,
"Maintain existing heavily wooded buffer
between the properties and the
Northway," unquote. And as the
residents in the neighborhood on the
east side of the Route 9 have told the
Great Escape and the town, they can now
hear the Northway since the Great Escape
removed some mature trees on the former
Animal Land property, because of the
increased Northway noise from removal of
relatively small number of trees. It
should be obvious that the clear -cutting
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
24
August 29, 2000
Page 167
unquote. I don't see how a conclusion
can be reached if many of the potential
impacts haven't even been addressed.
Although the economic benefits are
outlined in this document, I can not
find where the public needs to this
project was discussed. Does the town
have such a need to this project that
it's willing to sacrifice its
neighborhood character, wetland, the
environment, safety and the quality of
life for its residents?
During the SEQRA process the
Planning Board will be asked if this
project could result in any adverse
affect associated with certain issues,
such as noise, community or neighborhood
characters, drainage or flooding -
problems, aesthetics and a community's
existing plans or goals as officially
adopted. The environmental assessment
is also required to ask, quote, "Is
there likely to be controversy
related to the potential adverse
'
Page 166
Page 168
1
of large areas of dense woods would
1
environmental impact?" unquote. Only
2
cause a very serious Northway problem to
2
when the Planning Board members in good
3
nearby neighbors. However, this
3
conscious answer no to these questions
4
potential negative impact was also not
4
should the project move forward. And
5
addressed in the DGEIS or even
5
because of their location by the
6
identified as a concern, so essentially
6
neighborhoods and by the critical
'
7
the impact from the removal of these
7
wetland, I think this project, their
8
trees were not identified as a potential
8
expansion should be limited if there is
9
problem. So the possibility of a .
9
a potential for negative impact as far
10
parking garage was not addressed, nor
10
as the DGEIS goes, I feel there are too
11
was a possibility of sound walls on the
I
many critical issues that are not
12
13
Northway. And there is no mention of
rearranging the connecting road and
12
13
properly addressed or omitted entirely.
Thank
you.
14
parking lots or decreasing the number of
14
MR. CHAIRMAN: I think at this time
15
parking spaces needed in order to
15
we will take a quick five minute break,
16
preserve some of the wooded buffer on
16
and let's get up and stretch their legs
17
the west side of the property.
17
a little.
18
And when reviewing the EIS, the
18
(A short recess was taken.)
'
19
town must weigh evenly the economic,
19
MR. CHAIRMAN: we have about 30
20
social and environmental impact of the
20
more speakers, give or take, to go
21
proposed project. The DGEIS has already
21
through. What we are going to do we are
22
concluded that the economic and fiscal
22
going to go to 11 o'clock. Those
23
benefits, quote, "Far outweigh the minor
23
speakers we don't get to tonight, we are
24
and insignificant adverse impacts,"
24
continue, going to continue this
public
1
3-43
11
H
H
n
Public Hearing CondenseIt'
Page 169
1
comment tomorrow night starting at seven
1
2
o'clock, and it will be hosted at the
2
3
Queensbury Activity Center right where
3
4
we have our planning meeting.
4
5
MS. LaBOMBARD: Next is Scott
5
6
Cartier, Raymond Erb, and Karen Howe.
6
7
So Scott, come on down. Is he here?
7
8
MR. CHAIRMAN: Next speaker.
g
9
MS. LaBOMBARD: Raymond Erb.
9
10
SPEAKER: My name is Raymond Erb.
10
11
I live at Fitzgerald Road in Glen Lake.
11
12
As has been pointed out the
12
13
deterioration of the lake has gone down
13
14
in years. It's not what it used to be.
14
15
And the wetlands, the runoff into the
15
16
lake is -- could be very deteriorated on
16
17
the lake. And as far as the sewage
17
18
problem is I agree with Mike O'Connor
18
19
and George Stec, as he said, ship it out
19
20
rather than keep it in the area with the
20
21
large amount of sewage treatment plant.
21
22
The 200 foot ride that is proposed
22
23
over a 50 foot tree line, it will
23
24
definitely accelerate the sound above
24
Page 170
1
the tree line towards the lake. And if
1
2
you take a stone and skip it across the
2
3
lake, that's exactly what the sound
3
4
does. Somebody out in a rowboat or a
4
5
fishing boat or a good 200 feet off the
5
6
shore, I can hear them talking. It
6
7
sounds like they are out of the south
7
8
side of my window. So this is what is
8
9
going to happen with that roller coaster
9
10
as well as the sound of the coaster
10
11
itself, you are going to hear the people
11
12
screaming. It will keep you wide awake.
12
13
The other thing I recently saw on
13
14
television was in Saratoga Springs where
14
15
they were talking about a noise level
15
16
ordinance and the fellow says they have
16
17
a meter that they use to measure the
17
18
sound, but he said the fellow who had
18
19
the meter although or knew had use of
19
20
the meter was no longer in Saratoga so
20
21
they don't use it because no one else
21
22
knows how to do it. So there is a meter
22
23
available for your new ordinance that
23
24
you want to put in as far as sound goes.
24
3-44
August 29, 2000
Many, many of the other people Page 171
spoke on subjects that I would have
liked to have approached but what I am
mainly concerned with is the land value.
If the value on my land goes down, it
will hurt me in the long run. But I am
quite sure my taxes are not going to go
down either. Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
MS. LaBOMBARD: Karen Howe,
SPEAKER: Good evening. It has
been a long night and I want to
thank you first for allowing me the
opportunity to address you this evening.
My name is Karen Howe and I am a
resident of Queensbury. I was born in
the Glens Falls Hospital, grew up in
Twicwood and graduated from this very
high school. I moved to Fort Lauderdale
in the early '70s to further my career
in education.
When my husband and I decided to
start a family a little bit late in
life, there was no question where I
Page 172
wanted to raise my kids, right here,
.Hometown USA. If it weren't for the
Great Escape as the bread winner from my
family, I would not have been able to
afford to bring my family home. I serve
as the Director of Human Resources for
the Great Escape and I am responsible
for all of the recruiting of all our
full time and seasonal staff.
I think it's important to remind
everyone that the park supports over 50
full-time positions, year-round, and
that our seasonal jobs are counted on by
hundreds of local residents to support
their family's as well as provide a
learning environment for our first time
employees. Our 14 and 15 year old have
the opportunity to work with our
seasoned staff members. Helping them to
learn work ethnic, build summer
friendships in a family -oriented
environment, and allow for a wonderful
mentoring process. The continued growth
of the park simply allows us to give
I
back to the community and allow our
2
children a place, a place to work so
3
they might not have to leave this
4
beautiful area and so that they can
5
support their family's here locally.
6
My message has addressed many
7
issues to truly to the heart what I feel
8
is just or more important is the overall
9
impact our park has on this community
10
Where would we be today without the
11
financial support and growth the park
12
brings to this community? The
13
individual vendors, the hotels, the
14
businesses, the charities that all exist
15
mainly as a result of the Great Escape's
16
business are countless. The continued
17
growth only ensures that the continuing
18
success will remain there for those
19
companies and agencies. I understand
20
the concerns and caution and agree with
21
that, but please think about the
22
individual, the people that could lose
23
their jobs or complete businesses as a
24
result of losing the Great Escape to
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
23
CondenseIt"
Page 173
Page 174
this area.
Just as a few points of fact about
our positive economic impact that the
Great Escape expansion might have. Talk
about more quality jobs. First, payroll
right now in 1999 our payroll is
averaging at about 5.23 million dollars.
By 2004 we are looking at 10.9. Our
permanent full-time jobs will increase
from the 50 jobs now to over 100.
Seasonal jobs will increase from 1;400
to over 2,300.
Talk about local purchases and
local product and services that are used
by the Great Escape.. Right now we are
spending over 6 million dollars. Expect
it to be 12 million by 2004. The
variety of foods and services, just as
an example I am going to list a couple
but certainly this list is not all
inclusive. Purchases in and
installation of maintenance, fire
extinguishers, fire alarms, security
systems, construction, carpentry,
1
2
3
4
S
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
23
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
W
>.1
24
3-45
August 29, 2000
skilled craftsmen, paving materialsPage 175,
labor, delivery and supplies of
foodstuff and beverages, erection and
repair of fences in and around the park,
landscaping, thematic design and
painting, electricians, electrical
supplies, materials, hardware and tools,
signs, graphic design communications,
marketing materials, purchase and
distribution of fuel and energy
refrigeration and kitchen appliances,
trucking and transportation services,
mechanical parts and repair services,
decorations, detective supplies,
computer, technical, technical
maintenance support, lumber supplies,
laundry services, waste disposal, legal
services, engineers, consultants,
printing services and supplies, medical
services, office supplies and
advertising. The list goes on and on.
Think about what the Great Escape does
bring to this community and what we are
hoping to continue to bring. Thank you.
Page 176
MS. LaBOMBARD: David Edwards. Is
he here?
Warren Rosenthal. After Warren
would Kathy DiMartino and Colonel Robert
Avon get ready?
SPEAKER: Good evening. We have
heard a lot of comment this evening
about the concerns related to the
expansion of the Great Escape, and we
have heard a few remarks related to
potential economic benefits of the
expansion of the park. And I am here
tonight to talk about what we think are
some of the economic benefits of this
proposed expansion.
And I am president of the Warren
County Economic Development Corporation,
and I am representing our organization
here tonight. And on August 17th our
board unanimously agreed to endorse the
expansion of plans of the park subject
to the company adequately addressing the
concerns of traffic, noise, wastewater,
storm water, visual impact, and so
i
I
1
u
Public
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
23
24
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
13
13
14
1
'
165
17
18
19
20
21
'
22
�z
CondenseIt'
Page 177
forth. Our organization recognizes that
there are many issues surrounding this
expansion particularly affecting the
neighbors of the park, but we also need
to remember and understand that tourism
is the primary industry of our county
and of our region, and to the extent
that we can expand the tourism industry,
extend its season if not extend make it
year round as much as possible, then
that will have a positive economic
impact on the community and be able to
create better qualityjobs for all the
people in our community.
There is mainly four areas of
impact that we see from this expansion.
Payroll, purchase of goods and services,
taxes and multiply and affects. Pros,
expansion was over 25 full-time new
management, 20 full-time technical
positions, and 900 part-time positions.
As mentioned by some previous speakers
the payroll increases from approximately
five million dollars to a little over
Page 178
ten million dollars over the next five
years making it one of the largest
payrolls in the county and frankly in
the region. And as the previous speaker
just mentioned, currently purchasing six
million dollars in goods and services
locally which is projected to double
over the next five years, and this will
directly benefit local business people
and their employees as well.
The Great Escape currently pays' one
million dollars in sales taxes. I know
there was some discussion about by one
of the previous speakers was whether
that was significant enough impact
relative to the amount of effluent
generated by the park. The fact of the
matter it is still one million dollars
in sales tax is still represented about
three percent of total taxes paid sales
taxes, excuse me, paid in Warren County.
They are also paying about $150,000 in
school taxes, about $70,000 in special
district taxes. And these are projected
t9, 2000
Page 71e 9
1
to grow respectively to two million
2
dollars, sales taxes 309,000 in school
3
taxes, and about a little over M00,000
4
in special district taxes, again, if the
5
proposed expansion proceeds as discussed
6
in the plan.
7
Because the Great Escape draws
8
people from a very wide radius, over one
9
million visitors per year, roughly 40
10
percent stay overnight. Most visitors
11
to the Great Escape will also visit
12
other attractions patronize restaurants
13
and purchase goods from retailers
14
spending on average, we have a rake
15
here, we are approximating based on some
16
of the surveys 30 to $100 per day.
17
These dollars in turn will generate.
18
additional jobs in taxes in the
19
community.
20
And finally, as again mentioned by
21
some previous speakers, the Great Escape
22
has continuously demonstrated good
23
corporate citizenship in the community
24
donating over $100,000 in charities in
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
is
16
17
18
19
20
21
24
3-46
Page 180
the year 2000 offering free admission to
disadvantaged kids and charitable
organizations throughout the area. In
short, the Great Escape is a significant
economic engine for the town, county and
the region. With this expansion it will
become even more so. For this reason
the Warren County Economic Development
endorses the Great Escape expansion and
recommend that the Town Planning Board
accept the Draft EIS subject to the
company implementing adequate mitigation
measures specifically related to storm
water, wastewater, noise, visual impact.
Thank you very much.
MS. LOMBARD: Kathy DiMartino.
SPEAKER: Good evening. Kathy
DiMartino from Birdsall Road, Glen Lake.
We have been living on Glen Lake for ten
years now. It is our secondary
residence. Our primary residence is
downstate. And I have to say that we
have been to these meetings before
downstate. I am so proud of the people
r
I
Public
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
17
18
24
Condenselt'
Page 181
that have been here and support that you
have gotten and the very intelligent
responses that you have had from so many
people. I am not going to reiterate.
You know, obviously'we are very unhappy
being on Glen Lake. We are concerned
with their wastewater. We are concerned
with our lake. I am concerned with my
property values. We have put a lot of
money into our house. This is our
retirement plan. My husband is
self-employed, and we can see it is
going to be devalued if it continues as
is.
Nobody is against Great Escape.
They are against Great Escape taking
advantage of the neighborhood. My
experience on Long Island -- as you can
tell from my accent -- is that problems
do exist especially with sound barriers.
People are recommended, oh, you are
going to put up sound walls. Well, they
don't work. Believe me. I live
adjacent to Sunrise Highway, main road
Page 182
on Long Island. The State department
took a lot of property. They took down
the trees and they put up 18 foot sound
barrier walls. Only problem is the road
is above the sound barrier. And being a
half mile away, you can still hear every
truck, every motorcycle that passes.
Now there is more development going
on. They remove some trees with the new
development, the sound keeps increasing
and increasing. By removing those -trees
on Route 9, you are going to have a
worse problem than ever besides just the
sound alone.
I have heard everything that they
want to do within the park, but I
haven't heard yet even though talking
about tax monies what goes back to
Queensbury. This is where the park is
located but the tax monies are going to
Lake George. Lake George gets a lot of
tax monies from all those other hotels
and things that go on there. But
nothing is coming back to this
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
21
22
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
21
22
23
24
3-47
August 29, 2000
community. Nobody is addressing. I Page 183
haven't heard one thing say, ,Well, we
will try to do this, we will try to do
that." I haven't heard any solutions
there. I wasn't aware of this entire
study.
In fact, I was only notified of
this meeting yesterday and decided to
drive up here this morning because I
wanted to hear what was going on. I
would like you to think about having
some concessions to the community,
something that some kind of feed
kickback to help the schools, to help
the tax problems, to cleanup the lake.
It is not only Glen Lake. There is
Other water involved as well that. #his
runoff is going to be going on, and I
thank you for your time and I thank
everybody and I want to say how many
people showed up and stayed. Thank you.
MS. LaBOMBARD. Next speaker is
Colonel Robert Avon. Is Helen Miller
here? She just left. Robert Schulz.
After Mr. Schulz the following get Page 184
ready, Marie Miller and Jeff Bartone.
SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman, members of
the board. My name is Bob Schulz, and I
live at 2458 Ridge Road, Queensbury.
Shaping up to be a classic clash between
commercial development interest and
environmental preservation interest.
All reasonable people of course are
interested in both and favor of both.
It is just a question of balance.
I would hope that the stenography
transcript would be available soon but
on computer readable material at
reproduction cost for everyone, made
available to everyone.
In 1977 Warren County passed a
resolution creating the Warren County
Sewer District and sewer project. The
project was defined as including the
construction of an interceptor sewer
line with pumping stations from a point
in the hamlet of Bolton where the
existing sewer, sewer system of the
r
11
n
H
u�
I
Public
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
CondenseIt"
Page 185
hamlet can be picked up. This line was
to extend down the west side of the lake
through the village of Lake George to
pick up Lake George sewage effluent, and
then to the Glens Falls Sewage Treatment
Plant down Route 9. The design includes
a branch up the east side of the lake
essentially following State Route 9L to
a point in the Town of Queensbury to the
vicinity of Cleverdale or Dunham's Bay.
The line is to be constructed so that
additional point of entry can be
included, and so that localities along
the way may create new sewer districts
as developments occur.
I was reading from the resolution.
The resolution included a survey
description of the metes and bounds of
the district, which of course included
both sides of the lake and the Route 9
corridor down to Glens Falls. This
project that we are discussing tonight
goes within that district. The State
Environmental Quality Review Act
Page 186
1 requires a consideration of
2 alternatives, including alternative
3 sites. I don't see where the developer
4 has included a review of alternative
5 sites dismantling the park that the
6 facilities that are here now and moving
7 them to a site not included in a
8 critical environmental area. The Warren
9 County Sewer District boundaries include
10 two formally designated critical
i i environmental areas, Lake George -and
12 Glen Lake from the headwater of Glen
13 Lake, Rush Pond. State Environmental
14 Quality Review Act requires a
15 consideration not only of those kind of
16 alternatives, but the no action
17 alternative. The requirement that you
18 look and consider what is wrong with
19 what is there now, the project as we
20 have it now. I don't know that it
21 doesn't appear as though that
22 environmental review thus far has
23 considered either of the alternatives,
24 all reasonable alternatives for the no
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
22
23
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
22
23
3-48
A
19_ 2000
Page 18-1
action alternative.
The Queensbury board has placed
apparently a high priority on bringing
sewers up from the south to a point
pretty close to the Queensbury/Lake
George line. And of course at the end,
other end they have a high priority in
bringing the sewers down from the north
to the Queensbury Lake George line.
It is a very high, it is highly likely°
that should a municipal sewer line be
constructed that the park's wastewater
generating facilities will be converted
or connected to the municipal system.
The Draft Generic Environmental Impact
Statement mentions the possibility of
this event.
I would disagree with my friend
George Stec, you would not want to
lightly consider placing a municipal
sewer line down Route 9. People
shouldn't forget that municipal sewer .
lines induce development, so whereas
development is now limited by the soils
Page 188
and surrounding surface waters. All of
that with that limitation, those that
restraint disappears with the
construction of a municipal sewer
system. If people think the existing
planned expansion is going to cause
adverse impacts, they haven't seen .
anything.
That municipal sewer system goes
in. There is no limit to the amount of
development, the high-rises. There will
be a city developed around a park if the
municipal sewer goes down Route 9
certainly connecting Lake George to the
Hudson River. The park's wastewater
facilities should have been but were not
viewed as simultaneous contemporaneous
with an inextricably linked and
contiguous to the facilities that are
being proposed in the rest of the Lake
George or Warren County Sewer District.
The law requires and prohibits
segmentation. This area is in the
Warren County Sewer District. It has
Public Hearing
CondenseIt'
'
Page 189
August 29, 2000
1
2
never been removed. There is an
environmental review process underway
up
1
2
Page 191
MS. LaBOMBARD: your time is up,
3
north. There is another one underway
3
THE WITNESS: -- escaped on the
surface of the lands.
4
here. It seemed to me before you go any
4
One --
5
further someone should be coordinating
CHAIRMAN: Your time is up,
6
a
the two reviews. 'Your segment in the
h'IT Schulz.
. Schulz.
7
overall review of the Warren CountySPEAKER:
6
-- failure of municipal
8
Sewer Project. There is no question but
7
sewer from Santa Monica Bay to Rye
9
10
that these facilities that you are
that
8
9
Beach.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Thanks.
l i
proposing you are advancing the
10
MS. LaBOMBARD: Next Speaker is
construction Of the municipal sewer
11
Marie Miller and Jeff Bartone follows
12
system is going to be constructed
12
her.
13
simultaneously with and other
13
14
facilities, other sewer facilities, and
14
SPEAKER: Good evening. My name is
Marie Miller. I live at Glen Lake.
15
16
that they will be inextricably linked
and contiguous to those facilities.
15
I
have lived there for 45 years. And
17
The
environmental review that you have
16
everyone has talked about everything
18
underway now should have but did not
17
18
tonight, which I would have liked -to
have
19
consider all cumulative impacts.
brought up as well but it has-
20
21
How much time do I have left?
19
20
already been said.
Water will carry
22
MS. LaBOMBARD: Couple minutes.
Two minutes.
21
knows. We can hear the screaming of the
23
SPEAKER: In the time I have left I
22
23
children, and that really doesn't bother
24
would like to quote what the high court
24
me too much because I know they are
having a time.
good But the Bobsled
Page 990
1
has said with respect to these issues I
l
Page 192
2
have raised tonight. I will attempt to
2
noise is something else again. Our
grandchildren and the dog
'
3
complete this discussion in writing
3
are affected
very badly. I have to give him a
4
before the time limit period expires.
4
pill.
Not the grandchildren, the dog.
5
On second thought, I will include the
5
But my biggest concern is the water
6
7
major environmental review cases that
the high court has ruled on
6
of Glen Lake is being contaminated. I
and what
7
have this sign that'I wrote. And it
8
9
those, what the court has said with
respect to this issue of segmentation in
8
says, What is going to happen in ten
10
writing before the comment period
9
10
years? Will we have a sign like this
that will say no fishing, no swimming
11
12
expires.
It is true package treatment
11
and no drinking Glen Lake water? I hope
t
13
plant -- in accommodating to Michael
12
13
not because it would not be a good
thing. And on the other side it says,
14
O'Connor's -- it is true package
14
"We drink Glen Lake water." And with
15
16
treatment plants occasionally fail.
It's
15
that sewer plant I will bring You a
also true municipal sewer systems
16
glass of water.
17
fail, and the damage when a municipal
17
And that's the other one, no sewer
18
sewer system fails far exceeds an
18
plant. Filtration plant is the proper
'
19
occasional failure from an isolated
19
word for it. Just says, "Do not
20
package treatment plant. One only has
20
contaminate Glen Lake, please."
21
to look at not only the failures in the
21
Thank you for your time. Good evening.
22
Lake George sewer system when the
22
MS. LaBOMBARD. Jeff Bartone.
23
lateral Fort William Henry broke and all
23
Steven Greene. Also on deck Charles
24
the wastewater escaped --
24
Tall, Delores Dupuis, Canterbury Drive.
3-49
0
11
r
11
Public Hearing Condenselt"
Page 193
August 29, 20p0
1
2
Peter Christian. Jane Talley. June,
I'm sorry, dear.
1
Page 195
if that project, if the hotel is put
3
4
SPEAKER: June Talley. My name is
June
2
3
there too quickly without a complete
survey done or and done right. By
5
Talley. And I live on Pinewood
Avenue, which is the other side of the
4
that
I don't just mean shove] test pits, but
6
Northway beyond Rush Pond. We can hear
6
if there are artifacts there, and they
have found evidence of it
7
8
the noise to the Northway and Great
Escape now from there, and I live three
7
already, it
should be done proper, done properly and
9
blocks back from Rush Pond, Adirondack
8
9
the artifacts should be saved. In fact,
it might be an idea for
10
11
wetland. I don't know what it will be
like when they take the land and the
10
you people from
Great Escape. It would be a real plus
12
trees away that are a buffer now
i I
if you had it dug Properly and used that
13
preventing some of the noise from Great
12
13
for one of your interested like Fort
William Henry has done.
14
Escape. I am really concerned.
14
It has been a
drawing card for them for I
15
16
I am also concerned that they have
taken Rush Pond, the wetland there and
15
years.
worked up there as a volunteer with
17
put them, made a parking lot and the
16
17
Dr. Starbuck. So it could be something
that you could use to draw tourists
18
thought that they might put it under the
18
there too. -
19
20
Northway and dump stuff into Rush Pond,
I am really concerned about and I feel
19
Excuse me for talking away. I
21
very sorry for the people of Glen Lake,
20
21
guess you are from the --just the
thought. But I am concerned and I do
22
Twicwood and the areas where there are
22
hope that the board will monitor this
23
24
noise level too.
I have one more concern. Nobody
23
24
particular part of it. So I am asking
that you do if things go ahead, and I
Page 194
am
I
2
has addressed it as far as I know
tonight. On page 4 of the DGEIS it
1
very concerned for the Town of Page 196
3
speaks about the project about parking
2
3
Queensbury and I know it is in your
hands.
4
5
area C. They have already done stage
one and stage two cultural resource
4
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
6
survey was performed on the land there.
5
6
MS. LaBOMBARD: Thomas Mayer.
Okay. Peter Diddio. Denese Paddock.
7
And located one prehistoric site near
7
Mark Hoffman.
8
9
the proposed hotel which may be eligible
to the inclusion in the National
8
SPEAKER: A few brief comments. I
10
Register of Historic Places. To comply
9
10
would like to just echo the comment made
by several speakers that more time
11
with the State Historic Preservation -Act
11
should be provided for comment for
12
it is proposed that the disturbance to
12
people who to digest this large document
13
this potential archeological site will
13
and also potentially if technical
14
either be avoided during construction
14
expertise need to be recruited that
15
and operation of the project, that means
15
would provide some additional time. I
16
move the hotel or excavated prior to the
16
also have concerns about the degree of
17
construction in accordance with legal
17
independent technical review that would
1s
and regulatory requirements of the
18
be done by the town. I think most of us
19
State's Historic Preservation office.
19
are familiar with the fact that data and
20
21
This is a subject near and dear to my
heart, because I work with Dr. Starbuck,
20
21
interpretations that are presented by
22
volunteered since Roger's Island and 1
22
the sponsor of a project are clearly
biased in favor of the project and it's
23
am very concerned about the artifacts
23
really critical that qualified
24
and things that will be destroyed there
24
independent technical review be
3-50
Public Hearing CondenseItr"
August 29, 2000
Page
197
1
2
available to review this project.
In terms of just a reaction, I
1
Page 199
identified by that group as a way to
3
agree with many of the comments that
2
3
improve pedestrian and bicycle
4
were made. I also was very impressed
4
transportation was to identify a way for
5
with the degree and thoroughness of
people to live in the west side of town
6
review of the data by some of the
5
to get to the Warren County bicycle
7
speakers. The few speakers that did
6
trail, and they identified Gurney Lane
8
speak in favor of the project seem to
7
as really the only feasible way to get
9
focus mainly on the economic benefits.
8
people across the Northway to the Warren
10
I don't in anyway mean to denigrate the
9
County bicycle trail with the increased
11
12
economic benefits. There is no question
10
11
traffic being proposed for this project.
I wonder how the safety of bicyclists
13
that there will be some jobs created,
possibly some additional tax revenues.
12
13
and pedestrians on Gurney Lane will be
14
However, I think if one looks at what
protected. I think that is a real
15
the concerns are regarding our areas of
14
15
concern.
Finally with regard visual
16
17
economy rightpercent now with about two rcent
I think one could make the
16
impact, the town is currently
ntly in the
18
argument
gument that our problem is really not
17
18
process of updating its zoning codes
with an emphasis on trying to include
19
20
unemployment but rather underemployment
and bringing in 900 part-time jobs,
19
the visual impact on aesthetic quality
21
seasonal part-time jobs with no
20
21
of our community.
22
benefits, no pension and no health
At the same time I am very
23
insurance is not going to do anything to
�3
concerned about additional blacktopping
and parking lots along and adjacent
24
improve that situation.
to
Route 9. I took a quick look at the
1
124
Page
Page
Also to keep things in perspective
200
2
in terms of the 50 additional full-time
pictures out that were on display out
there, and I didn't see very much being
3
4
jobs that would be created. The way you
know
3
done to modify or mitigate the negative
sometimes it is hard to think about
4
visual impact of additional blacktop
5
6
numbers but I try to put it into m Y
perspective. My little doctor's office
5
along a major roadway. Thank you.
'
7
employs ten full-time employees who have
6
7
MS. LaBOMBARD: There are five
speakers left, or I have five cards
8
pension benefits and health insurance.
8
here. Jack Fox, Hal Halliday, Dayrene
9
10
That's 20 percent of the additional
jobs, full-time jobs that would be
9
10
Patten, Eric Gilbert, and Scott Malpin.
Jack
11
created by Great Escape with all of the
11
Fox is next.
12
environmental impact, and so forth,
12
SPEAKER: Thank you. I know it is
getting late. I will keep it really
'
13
14
associated with that. Just to keep
things in perspective.
13
short. My name is Jack Fox. I moved to
15
One other comment. I attended a
14
15
this community about three and a half
'
16
meeting which was sponsored by the
16
years ago. I live here in Queensbury,
work here in Queensbury.
17
18
Glens Falls Transportation Council, the
17
Obviously, as you can see by my
19
Town of Queensbury, Glens Falls Hospital
Healthy
18
shirt, I am an employee of Great Escape,
Heart Program, the New York
19
Finance Director at Great Escape. Also
20
State Department of Health regarding
20
a homeowner here.
21
22
bicycle and pedestrian transportation,
trying to foster
21
I moved here, as I say, three and a
23
that in terms of
improving the public health of our
22
half years ago. I am veryha
happy here
24
community. One of the items that was
23
24
I would very much like o stay for a
long of time.
period Very much enjoy
3-51
11
n
Public
I
this community. Like to be part of it.
2
I am not here to speak to you solely as
3
a finance director at the Great Escape.
4
I am here to speak to you largely as
5
community member.
6
Looking at the EIS study you can
7
see the impact we have had here. We
8
have already talked about the tax
9
dollars, the additional employees it
10
brings. I am here because I honestly
I I
believe the continued growth of this
12
park is good for this community and good
13
for everyone involved. It brings both
14
tourists and citizens like myself. I am
15
glad to say I moved, proud to say I
16
moved, brings people like us to the
17
community, helps support many of the
18
people born and raised in this area.
19
Several of my coworkers started out
20
seasonal employees and continued to work
21
this area. Opportunity for them brings
22
people like outsiders the chance to come
23
and the opportunity to come and join
24
them. I think Great Escape is a solid
1
member. I am glad to say a lot of the
2
citizens that work at the Great Escape
3
are solid members of the community. I
4
am proud of our growth in recent years.
5
I am happy to see we along with several
6
other businesses are interested in
7
continuing to grow this community. I
8
would like to see that continue, and I
9
hope this board is interested in seeing
10
that continue.
11
I did, I would like to see it
12
continue both for the employees of the
13
Great Escape and the residents. I think
14
it is great. Some of the other impacts
15
are not only economic. I hope that a
16
lot of the residents in this area come
17
and enjoy our park as well and enjoy the
18
park. I think it has got a lot of the
19
impact, a lot of growth in economic ways
20
and entertainment factors, other factors
21
this community.
22
I think when looking at some of the
23
negative, I think we loose. Need to
24
look at the lot of the positive facts, a
CondenseIt'
Page 201
Page 202
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
21
23
3-52
August 29, 2000
lot of entertainment Opportunity,
lot Page 203
If growth factors, business factors,
increasing groom. I think I have heard
a lot of factors but I would like for
this board to consider a lot of the
Positive impacts that are going to come
along with the growth, the
entertainment, a lot of positive grow
both to this business and this
community, both for community members
and for the business. Thank you.
MS. LaBOMBARD: Thank you. Hal
Halliday.
SPEAKER: Good evening. My name is
Hal Halliday. I reside in the Town of
Queensbury for 28 years. I have been a
volunteer fireman for North Queensbury
for over 20 years. I love the area, and
I think you have a great quality of life
in the Town of Queensbury. That`s the
reason I moved here from New Jersey.
In Queensbury we have great
schools. We have good libraries, a
great senior citizen center, and greater
emergency services. I believe we have Page 204
great roads. I know you have -- we have
great roads. We have good things
because we have a good balance of
businesses and residences in the Town of
Queensbury to make our life enjoyable.
In order to have reasonable tax as good
quality of life and good place to work,
we need to look at where the money comes
from that to enjoy this quality of life.
It is a true fact that the tourism
dollars generated in our area turn over
many times before leaving. A visiting
guest stays at a hotel, buys food, fills
the car with gas, and visits local
attractions. All of the people who
service these tourists then spend the
Payroll dollars in our area again
supporting the lifestyle. Again,
turning over more payroll dollars to be
spent on the area.
Proven studies have stated that a
tourism dollar turns over seven times in
the community before it leaves. Anyone
1
LN
Public Hearing
CondenseIt
"
Page 205
August 29, 2000
1
2
that takes the time to figure can figure
out the domino theory,
1
Page 207
expansion effort. I think it would be
3
1 am presently employed at the
2
in the best interest of our town and my
4
Great Escape. I am a full-time seasonal
3
4
family. Thank you very much.
5
manager, and very soon hope to be
5
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
6
enjoying the full-time yearly staff.
Ms. LaBOMBARD: Dayrene Patten.
7
The Great Escape is a solid employer.
SPEAKER: My name is Dayrene
8
It is committed to safety and our local
Patten., I live at 7 Jackson Road in
9
environment.
8
South Glens Falls. I represent the
10
I live on the east side of Lake
9
Great Escape as an employee of the park
11
George, and I can't hear the Bobsled and
10
for the last 14 seasons, 14 years, a
12
I don't hear Elvis singing. But I do
11
full-time staff member.
13
hear the boats on Lake George. I did
12
Just to begin quickly, I was
14
hear the Mini Ha Ha whistle, and do hear
13
Mr. Wood's personal secretary for a few
15
16
an occasional plane to enjoy the
14
15
years so I am familiar with what his
efforts were before he
splendor of Lake George.
sold the park.
17
I don't come before our board toPark
16
Just going back, the p opened in
18
complain because it still amazes me that
17
1954- As Hal said, it's amazing to me
19
people move onto the shore of Lake
18
People that live in an area and know
20
George and the next thing they are at
19
what is existing and then oppose the
21
the town meeting complaining about the
20
expansion plans of the park and the
22
boats on the lake, or move near the
21
environmental impact. You know what
23
airport and complain about the noise
22
it is that the park presents to the
24
flying. Or some live near the amusement
23
community. Just like we work on the
24
airport, just like SPAC; again Lake
I and complain about the noise of the
2 amusement near their house.
Page 2061
3
On one of my days off last week I
4
made a mistake, drove up Route 149, ma
5
a left turn, headed south, got stuck in
6
traffic, and actually thought with the
7
other road choices I could have made to
8
go to the same location. My point is,
9
we all have choices to make about our
10
daily life. Let's not make other people
I
change to suit our own personal needs.
12
To the board when you answer
13.
your
statements to people who moved here five
14
years ago, tell them that they should
15
not have assumed that the Great Escape
16
would never expand. We all have choices
17
to make, where to live. My family made
18
the choice to live here. If I was not
19
happy and my family was not happy living
20
here, we would move just like we did 28
21
years ago. If the Impact Statement is
22
done, if it meets guidelines and goes by
23
regulations for this area, I ask you to
24
please support the Great Escape in their
PPaov A1P� - 1�....r4:1____a__ f,-- - - - _ __ -
1
2
3
de I4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
22
23
3-53
George has certain things that as part
of a tourist area, yes, we will have
issues that perhaps neighborhoods and
quiet neighbors would not normally
fathom as part of being in their
neighborhood, but again as being part of
a tourist area certainly we know that we
need to encourage tourism into the
Warren County area.
If anybody can recall the park in
1989, the park was sold to International
Broadcasting Corporation. During the
two years IBC owned the park they
drained the park. They did not put
anything new into the park. Neighbors
should know who visited there is no
capital investment, no capital projects
and the park suffered. It started to
die actually. And if you ask Mr. Wood
or if you ask anybody in the amusement
industry, you know it is crucial to have
expansion, and, you know, make
improvements.
So Mr. Wood in 1991 bought the park
Page 208
Public Hearing
T"
CondenseTt '
Page 209 August 29,20()()
in order to save it because he knew
F3did
1
Page 21 I
uld die a slow, painful death if it
Just want to say a couple things
ot have capital projects. It did
2
about the Great Escape and about theme
•
4
5
not improve during the first year he
bought the park back. He put three in
4
Parks. As I started when I was 17 years
old, given an opportunity to learn new
6
7
years, three new rides and one
reconditioned.
5
6
things, to meet people, to have fun. I
was, you know, looking for
He did that because he
a job.
8
knew the park was suffering, the
7
Working at the Great Escape a lot of the
9
10
attendance was dropping. And again, the
impact on the area
8
9
Young people learn how to be
responsible, learn how to be
would have been
10
good
11
significant.
members of the society, learn how to
12
I just ask that people remember
11
hold a job and to be friendly to
13
that is a Draft Environmental Impact
12
and to learn about money and about
14
Statement. A draft in any business is
13
budgeting and about, you know, earning
15
16
always subject to change, subject to
improvement before
14
15
theca pay.
We also employ senior
17
the final version is
made public and is out there for review.
16
citizens who,
You know, use that as an opportunity to
18
Six Flags again is in a business. They
17
do things, you know, beyond their career
t
19
20
are in a for profit business. There is
18
goals as well as their mentors also to
those young And
21
no question about that. They do have a
20
people. I was very
thankful at 17 that I had
22
23
couple choices. They can choose to
expand the park. They can also choose
to
21
22
the
Opportunity to learn about those things,
about becoming a good, responsible
not expand. They could sell the
24
park. They could choose many different
citizen. And I think that as Six
24
Flags we do offer that.
1
Page 210
options, but it's critical to the
Page 212
2
residents and to the area that the park
1
And I just want to thank you very
3
4
expand and continue to be strong. So
that
2
3
much and say that I do support that the
growth that this park has to offer to
5
we again can encourage tourism and
4
the community as well as to
6
support for the area. Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I know I said 11
5
myself and
other young people who do wish to start
'
7
o'clock we were going to cut. Believe
6
7
off as their careers there at the Great
Escape.
8
it or not, we are down to two speakers.
. 9
MS. LaBOMBARD: Eric Gilbert.
g
9
MS. LaBO,�fBARD: And Scott Malpin.
SPEAKER:
10
11
SPEAKER: Hello, Eric Gilbert. I
10
Thank you, ladies and
gentlemen. I know that I an, the last
12
am the manager of operations at the • ;
Great Escape theme park. I am a
1 I
one of a long evening of comments. And
13
newly -- I have newly moved here from
12
a lot of good issues have been brought
14
actually San Francisco, California. I
13
up so I will make my comment very brief.
15
guess around late March I was given an
14
15
As mentioned, my name is Scott
Mal in, the Director
16
17
opportunity. Scott called me from the
Great Escape,
16
of Operations out
at Great Escape. Unlike many that
said -he has got a
17
you
have heard from tonight, I am
18
19
beautiful theme park he started out that
18
new in
this area. I moved here in March.
I could use to grow that so I could
19
Although I am not new to the.area,
20
learn more, also give me an opportunity
20
I am
not new to the theme park business.
21
to see this beautiful area and
21
I
have been with Six Flags for about
22
experience. Me, I'm mobile so I enjoyed
22
ten
years
23
24
the opportunity and I am enjoyingthe
23
In that time period I have had the
opportunity.
24
opportunity to work in four different
3-54
-
1
H
Public
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
23
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
CondenseI '
Page 2 3T
states and four different parks. I have
seen parks firsthand that have had to
work around stringent environmental
guidelines, and I know that it can
happen, I have been there, I have done
it. We are committed to that.
I felt fortunate to have been
directed to come to this park not only
because an opportunity for advancement
personally, but it is a beautiful area
to come, one of the most beautiful areas
where we have to park. I strongly
support the continued growth of the
Great Escape and the positive impact it
will have on the Town of Queensbury, on
the surrounding communities. Thank you
very much.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That's it. No other
speakers. Okay. We close the comment
period for tonight. We want to thank
everyone for coming out tonight and
expressing the concerns. I would like
to remind you on behalf of the Town and
Planning Board that the written Planning
Page 214
Board is still in proceedings, we will
accept written comment at the Town Hall
to September l2th. I encourage you to
not only follow-up with written comment,
make sure the town does receive it so it
can be included in the final document we
are planning on establishing.
Anything staff wants to add before
we close up? No. Okay. Thank you very
much.
(The hearing in the above -entitled
matter was concluded at 11:06 p.m.)
Z9, 2000
1 Page 215
2
3 CERTIFICATION
4
5 I, PEGGY ALEXY, Shorthand Reporter and
6 Notary Public in and for the State of New York, do
7 hereby CERTIFY that the foregoing record taken by
8 me at the time and place noted in the heading
9 hereof is a true and accurate transcript of the
10 same, to the best of my ability and belief.
11
12
13
14
15 PEGGY ALEXY
16
17 DATED: September 5, 2000
18
19
21
3-55
Ci
1
1
1
1
I
SECTION 3.2
INDEX TO TRANSCRIPT
Fl,
L
r�
I
Public Hearing
S 100 [i) 179:16
$100,000 [3) 13:15
179:3 179:24
$150,000 [1) 178:22
$33 [21 106:1 106:3
$70,000 [21 94:2
178:23
'70s [i) 171:20
'79 [1) 102:12
'80 [i) 102:12
.20 (1) 106:11
.6 [41 106:3 106:4
106:7 106:8
0 [i) 20:2
00111 1:8
06 [11 214:12
1 [1) 20:1
1,400 [2] 14:10
174:11
1.1 [11 37:9
1.5 [s1 26:5 40:10
57:15 72:11 72:11
10 [11 1:19
10.9 [i) 174:8
10/14/99111 21:5
100 [81 10:10 15:23
39:2 50:5 58:18
77:6 137:24 174:10
103,454 [i1 72:14
11 [s) 21:8 21:11
168:22 210:6 214:12
11.4[11 21:18
11.5[11 46:7
11011] 15:24
12 [31 18:20 19:9
174:17
12,000 [i] 38:24
12.2 [1) 19:5
12.5 [i1 18:19
12801 [i] 1:15
12866 [i] 1:20
12th [s) 3:16 18:14
66:7 134:3 214:3
136 [1) 26:6
14 [51 56:11 85:12
172:17 207:10- 207:10
149 [71 34:15 35:23
56:23 61:8 79.24
131:24 206:4
15 [41 34:9 37:2
50:6 172:17
16.9[11 21:20
17[21 211:3 211-20 2
17,000 [i1 94:12 3
17th [1) 176:19 3
18131 80:4 91:11 3
182:3
188 [11 20:2 3
19 [1) 80:4 3
1953 [i)154:1 3
1954 [11207:17 3
1973 [i1102:12
De..-. A 7---- n _ ,..
1 Y��/ [i)184:17
1980 (2119:23 97:8
1988 [1) 87:10
1989 [11208:11
199019116:22 17:1
17:20 31:6 54:2
69:4 69:7 120:
1991 (11208:24
1996 [il 99:7
1999 [41 17:21 120:
120:11 174:6
2151 25:22 36:21
45:3 52:11 122:1
2,000[2] 83:23
83:24
2,300 [21 29:18
174:12
2-10 (1) 50:12
2.1.10[ll 72:3
20 [i9) 15:20 26:14
26:20 33:17 34:20
37:2 42:24 43:23
50:5 60:20 61:10
106:1 106:2 106:7
143:7 161:15 177:2
198:9 203:18
2001,51 41:24 42-10
67:14 77:2 85:11
85:14 85:22 127:8
139:23 147:11 161:12
162:11 164:12 169:22
170:5
200-room [l] 5:20
2000 [6) 1:8 31:6
38:4 40:6 180:1
215:17
2004 [3114:9 174:8
174:17
21 [21 20:1 80:3
22[l] 31:4
22,000 [ll 79:7
23 [r) 138:15
230 [1) 25:23
24 [2) 78:22 79:2
2458 [il 184:5
Z5 [31 143:7 149:9
177:19
250 [2l 26:2 75.16 .
255 [1) 38:10
257 [il 10:9
27 [11 28:12
28 [3) 161:4 203:16
206:20
29 [1) '1:8
9th121 18:6 21:2
(i) 20:24
-34 [il 117:19
-44 [1) 20:14
.1 [1) 27:5
.30 [1] 27:6
5 [il 99:19
0 [7) 3:18 82.19
24:23 138:9 151.16
68:19 179:16
0
Condenselt"m
30,000 V) 8
300 [i) 75:16
309,000111 179:2
30th [i] 107:9
34 [i) 70:20
1 3512) 102:4 103:1
8 350 [11 40:18
39 [il 55:2
7 4 141 3:18 42:8
121:8 194:2
4,000 [1] 79:8
5 4,500 [2] 68:1
77:10
4-21 (1) 49:11
4-24111 41:23
4-6 [11 46:6
4-9 [11 74:1
4.0[11 53:20
4.1.1 [1153:21
4.2 [1) 53:22
4.8 [il 117:22
4.8.2[2149:1 51:8
40 [7) 15:21 22:13
22:21 39:1 39:14
97:3 179:9
41 [il 18:16
410[1) 49:16
411111 49:16
41201 49:16
42 [1] 121:17
421 111 49:2
423 [11 54:20
44 [i1 152:4
45 PI 20.9 94:17
99.10 138:10 191:15
45,636 [il 72:6
46111 36:18
48 [i1 107:16
5121 42:8 215:17
5,000 [i1 75:14
5.2 [i1 14:7
5.23 [i1 174:7
5.4[11 46:8
5.7[2] 17:23 55:4
50 [71 75:12 85:10
122:12 169:23 172:11
174:10 198:2
500,000 [il 57:20
51103 [il 20:2
546 [il 153:21
55 [2) 18:15 20:5
6 PI 25:22 71:17
174:16
60151 22:13 22:21
42:3 114:17 151:16
60,000 [il 72:8
600 [i) 65:20
600,000 [2) 94:13
96:19
68,454 [1) 72:13 a
6th [31 21:13 21:14 a
3-56
21:16
7 [5) 1:8 26:10
46:2 122:15 207:7
7-3 [11 46:2
75 [11 30:1
[ 765 vi 1:14
8 [1) 130:12
8.2 [2) 17:23 55:3
80 [41 15:22 26:11
26:17 39:23
85 [11 38:10
86 (1) 113:15
87151 26:22 28:9
32:9 36:1 61:1
91561 5:19 9:15
16:24 19:9 27:17
28:1 29:3 32:10
33:10 33:14 35:16
35:23 36:3 43:9
46:18 49:12 53:2
57:22 58:10 58.22
59:20 60:22 60:24
61:3 61:7 61:9
62:3 62:9 _ 75:23
78:23 79:24 88:15
88:22 102:14 102:21
109:21 110:2 130:16
130:23 136:22 136:23
137:1 148:3 149:14
149:20 157:22 160.1
165:8 165:12 165:17
182:12 185:6 185:20
187:21 188:13 199:24
9.1 111 19:3
90 [1) 43:6
90,000[1] 77:5
900 [2] 177:21 197:20
900,000111 72:11
95,000 [1) 72:14
96 [11 82:15
99111 88:6
9L[i) 185:8
9N [i) 33:12
a.m [21 26:3 44:18
abatement [11 51:7
abbreviated [1] 34:21
ability [21 10:15
215:10
able [is] 28:5 31:23
34:13 57:22 66:11
80:8 81:9 . 84:6
90:1 147:13 147:13
147:15 149:21 172:4
177:12 a
above[io) 19.5 a
21:8 21:11 42:6
51:12 74:17 74:19
103:6 169:24 182:5
above -entitled [i] a
214:11
absent [2) 27:4 1
27:20
absorb [i) 71:21 a
bsorbing [1) 85:1 a
ecelerate [il 169:24 1
ccent[1] 181:i9 a
$100 - additiot
accept [4] 112:2
144:18 180:11 214:2
acceptable [21 76:6
87:16
acceptance [11 154:23
accepted[') 2:16
access [71 27:12
28:9 28:14 28:18
32:9 52:5 79:22
accommodate [41
29:6 31:17 45:8
52:5
accommodating [i)
190:13
aw��uipanieu [i)
47:8
accomplish [i) 50:11
accomplished 121
51:9 148:20
accordance[ll 194:17
accordingly [1] 48:18
account 12) 6113
77:14 ..
accounted [il 32:8
accumulate [1) 73:9
accumulation [1)
73:10
accurate [21 84:15
215.9
acknowledge [2)
61:5 164:9
acknowledging [i1
60:15
acoustical [21 .164:4
164:5
acres [a)10:9 10:10
21:18 21:19 46:7
46:8 77:1 140:10
act [s) 48:18 134:1
185:24 186:14 194:11
acting [2) 103:13
112:15
action 13) 122:20
186:16 187:1
activates [1) 64:2
activities [2) 49:5
51:23
activity [21 144:22
169:3
actual [s) 18:15
109:4 114:2 120:2
154:14
ctuality [11 56:17
dd[ill 6:16 6:21
8:11 40:19 42:24
69:5 69:8 113:22
133:3 142:21 214:8
dded [sl 10:5
16:22 37:6 76:15
92:21 108:13 120:11
29:8
dding [i1 35:4
ddition [71 55:1
5:22 67:13 70:21
12:15 119:18 130:18
dditional r351 20:22
Public Hearing
20:23 21:20 21:20
35:4
37:3
52:12
52:13
52:19
65:17
70:3
72:24
73:6
75:23
75:24
108:8
110:16
I14:10
114.13
114:15
120:1
120:12
120:14
122:9
122:11
123:1
179:18
185:12
196:15
197:13
198:2
198:9
] 99:22
200:4
201:9
Additionally [1]
74:24
additions [z) 12:4
133:4
address [221 4:9
7:6 ] 4:21 34:24
41:16 47:22 79:1
79:19 82:7 82:22
83:22 84:21 88:12
91:5 94:21 96:21
104:15 122:4 124:2
129:20 164:17 171:1
addressed [24) 32:13
33:6 33:15 41:10
43:21 44:7 44:19
46:20 49:1 53:4
55:13 55:24 84:7
92:24 103:16 103:17
124:2 131:6 166:5
166:10 167:3 168:12
173:6 194:1
addresses [21 37:17
55:18
addressing [51 13:8
35:12 102:23 176:22
183:1
adequate [41 29.6
31:17 145:7 180:12
adequately [6] 31:24
35:1 61:4 62:1
130:8 176:22
adhered p) 68:23
Adirondack [ii]
48:15 81:2 81:18
81:21 82:1 97:24
98:2 129:23 132:7
132:9 193:9
Adirondacks [3]
48:16 97:7 100:8
adjacentp,) - 30:5
45:19 47:9 48:14
68:6 68:15 71:8
120:23 130:3 181:24
199:23
admission [z) 106:18
180:1
admitted [1] 128:9
admittedly [1) 17:4
adopted [31 117:4
165:11 167:21
adult [3)104:9 105:24
149:1
advance[i) 113:17
CondenseIt"
159:11 181:17
dverse
airport [z)
207:24
205:23
f67:7
19) 54:11
83:14 93:7
alarms (1)174:23
13:4 166:24 167:1567.24 188:7
ALEXY [2]
215:5
advertisements
[z)
2=21 55:9
algae
algae [11139:22
[
advertising [2] .65:5
alleviate[2)
7_23
175:21
8:15
advice [1] I) 3:21
allow [14]
13:19
advised 1
[) 66:19
52:2 77:9
90:7 90:16
8723
114:15
aesthetic [1] 199:19
124:11 126:14
15523
aesthetics 151 112:9 158:3 158:22 172:22
4
113:2 116:15 123:11 173:1
167:19
allowable [1) 77:16
affect 117) 49:21
allowed [71 59:7
89:9 90:19 93:8
127:15 145:4 145:6
95:8 109:4 110:1
145:15 146:8 147:2
110:4 121:5 121:10
131:21 132:3
allowing [51 33:10
132:20 48:8 80:22 144:1
150:4 155:11 161:24 171:13
16T:16
affected [9) 29:4
llows [z] 115:20
a172
43:11 65:23 68:10
112.21
24
alluded [ll
113:3 121:7
90:19
131:2 192:2
almost [6) 14:11
affecting [1] 177:3
2720 38:13 82:19
affects z 148:6 158:17
[ J 117:17
177:18
alone [4] 25:13
afford z
[ l 72:24
143:6 159:10 182:14
172:5
along [21] 49:20
o
aforementioned
5820 70:4 70:5
[ 1 1
1
99:5 114:24 122:13
afternoon (3) 25:19
139:15 146:18 147:12
25:21 30:4
147:18 150:13 150:14
again [26] 7:2
185:13 199:23 200:5
19:7 20.10 21:1
202:5 203:7
21:10 24:22 30:8
Alpine[") 41:3
30:21 100:20 109:18
49:7 92:24 110:6
115:12 117:12 120:4
119:13 135:5 135:11
121:11 135:15 163:7
135:14 136:3 136:6
179:4 179:20 192:1
163:22
204:18 204:19 207:24
alter[2) 103:22 122.24
208:6 209:9 209:18
210:4
alternative[9) 46:21
a
against s
g [ ] 87:21
7320 116:17 123:6
159:8 186:2 186:4
129:17 148:22 181:15
186:17 187:1
181:16
alternatives [s) 46:12
agencies [21 20:11
173:19
46:14 123:12 148:18
186:2 - 186:16 186:23
agency [21 3:8
186:24
134:14
always [4] 6:20
ago 1131 38:15 43:24
25:15 92:12 209.15
44:8 103:8 103:9
107:21 110:7 110.14
amazes [1) 205:18 a
a
117:5 200:15 200:22
amazing [�1 40:15
206:14 206:21
207:17 a
agree [9) 6:15 79:20
18:4
80:8 80:13 124:6
20:2ambient 1:
21:3
148:16 169:18 173:20
mb
ambiguities [1] 26:16
197:3
a
ambiguity [i) 30:8
agreed [1) 176:20
ambulance [1) 132:4 a
agreement [1) 137:23
amend [i] 119:24 a
ahead
Am
advancement 1
[)
[4]
l 17:16 120:18
7:6
195:24
encans [1]
39:23 2
4
213:9
ammonia [ll
73:17
advancing [1) 189:10
air (41 40:6
132:23 137:20
112:14
amount [12]
16:9 3
3
advantage [3] 106:7
aircraft [1]
53:15
16:18 22:22
61:16 813
44:21
88:13 3
PP.Qov A L.- _ n, ._� is -- _ - _ .-. - - - . _ -- .
1
3-57
89:5 94:14 169.21
178:16 188:10
ample 11]
54:15
amusement 111] 37:22
38:6 51:24
59:2
107:19 108:2
132:1,
141:18 205:24
206:2
208:20
amusements [1)
92:2
analysis [131
27:21
42:1 65:19
65:24
69:24 71:6
71.15
71:23 73:3
75:22
85:6 115:2
115:7
analyzed [21
30:7
114:6
ancillary [1]
63:14
Andrew[2]
14022
140:23
angle [1] 162:7
Angleson [1] 47:24
Animal [7] 22.12
46:23 50:2 149:11
150:20 160:16 165:21
Ann [2) 128:4 134:22
Anna [2) 7723
82:15
Annie [1) 82:12
announcements [2)
62:22 62:23
annual [11 99:19
answer[] 2:12
11:18 12:23 25:12
133:20 168:3 206:12
answered [11 4:2
answering [1] 11:18
answers [2] 133:16
133:16
Antbony[2] 1:12
11.16
anticipated [21 7:11
37:11
anticipation [1) 53:8
antifreeze [4] 682
75:10 75:13 90:20
anyone's [11 MZ4
anyway [1]
apologize [1) 113-16
appear [ll 186.21
ppendix [11 27:6
pplaud [1) 162:23
pplause[9] 23.15
3 5:10 36:15 652
95:10 96:23 107:2
127:4 137:13
pples [2) 69:2
69:2
ppliances [1] 175:11
pplicaut 1291 2:12
:22 3:6 4A 1
:7 25:5 29:22 1
1:15 32:12 32:16 )
3:6 34:11 34:21 1
7:17 43:10 46.10 1
19:24 120:6 120:19 1
Additionally - aj
121:12 121:14-i2);it
123:8 134:5 154:5
155:3 155:6 155:15
157:17
application [2] 154.15
154:17
applications [11
154:8
ayylleQ[1) 36:17
applies [1] 61:19
apply [3) 19:7
21:10 74:23
appreciate [21 41:21
123.21
approach [5) 26:13
26:15 64:3 154:4
157:8
approached [1] 171:3
approaching 11)
88:21
appropriate [1) 134:18
approval 171 32:12
37:15 ,44:3 47:2
126:22-154:12 161:8
approvals [11 7:5
approve [1) 47:5
approved [4) 50:17
124:14 146:1 161:8
approving (1) 163:8
approximating 11]
•179.15
aquifer [1] 145:8
archeological [4)
10:20 11:22 12:1
194:13
area [124] 8:5
9:13 9:13 9:14
9:18 9:22 10:1
10:3 27-24 29:10
32.14 32.20 32.21
32*23 33:4 34:18
34:23 35:8 Q 19
43"2 46:16 48.13
50:2 50:3 52:10
52:23 55:16 56:20
56:21 56:22 57:1
57:7 57:9 58:17
59:13 59:17 62:3
64:22 67:18 67:22
68:7 69:11 70:10
70:14 71:7 71:7
71.20 74:13 74:19
75:12 76:12 76:13
76:18 77:18 81:12
B4:23 85:17 86:1
36:10 86:19 87:15
38.20 89.8 89:14
39:15 91.21 96:8
�8:13 102:4 104.21
06:8 112:9 114:24
15:2 115:6 115:10
18.16 118:19 120.24
22:18 125:4 125:17
27:7 127:14 128:2
28.24 130:22 131:24
32:6 141:13 142:11
45:24 146:6 147:23
50:15 150:21 151:7
57:7 169:20 173:4
Public Hearing
'
CondenseltIm
174:1 180:3 186:8 attempts] 24:2T
188:23 194:4 201:18 61:12 83:7 145:183:23 Ba be areas -board
y �' [ll ] 56:19
190:2
ake 1
[
193.6 211:17
204:12 204:18 204:28 ards [ll 810.52 BBB 154:6
] 55:7 biased [1] 196:22
206:23 207:18 208:2 attempting [4] 35:24 [ ] 191:8 bi Cle
60:9
208:7 208:9 209:10 67:4 76:7are
210:2 210:5 210:21 attendance
[61 23:18 Bear 1 105:15
Bear[,,
:13 51:11 128:15
s
1 8 1 199.2 199 5
212:18 212:19 213:10
[1617:g
13:10 20:19 20:21
20:23
beautiful[lo199.9
183:5 ] 77;18
91:22 91:23 112.15 bicyclists
away
area's [ll 132:10
37:11 51:2
51:16 52:6 54:24
[1] 199:11
y [7163:1 103:4 150:15 173:4 210:18 bi
103:10 160:4 182:6 g [13] 15:18
areas R4] 9:9
9:12 42:15 43:7
210:21 213:10 213:11 35:22
62:15 64:9 98i22 193:12 195:19 39:15 85:6 95:19
121:3 beauty
49:17 55:23 56:6
62:13
121:19 209:9 awful [2] 100:17
attended 152:10
�] 119:19
[1] 132:11 95:20 96:4 96:17
became [i] 131:11 103:24 105:19 131:10
69:9 69:18 198:15 B 2
85:9 89:23 90:17 [ ] 9:22 109:24
become [7] 25:4
25.4
152:15 165:6
133:1 141:4 142:20 attending [1) 57:16 background [s] 19:4
37t18 43:23
64:18 63:*5180:
bigger
biggerL2] 95:17
177:15 186:11 ]93:1 attention [3: 17:17 19:6164:6 21:11 84:11
177:15 186:1 ] 39:15
13:23
becomes [2) biggest
193:22
197:15 213:11
133:13
attitude
backing[ll 61:6
152:20
159:8
[a] 86:17
92:20 98:10 192:5
argue [1] 120:7
argued [2] 61:21
[1] 64t4
attorneys [2] 63:18
63:19
backtracking U]
26:20
becoming
l 22ng [zl 152:16 Biggs [ll 12:12
bike [91 7:15 43:8
160:23
bedtime [1) 129i4
85:13 86:6
argument
attract z
[ ] 39:20
backup
P [ll 60:19
began 3
g
86:10
91:23 119:1 131:1
[2] 120:10 151:9
197:18
backward 1
[ ] ] 19:3
[ l 126:14
144:10 149:21
I50:15
arise [11 49:3
attraction [11 13:12
attractions [141 6:16
backyard [1) 110:5
bad 80:7
begin [s] 16:19
Bill [1) 12:5
arrivals [1] 30:15
arrive
6:18 7:5 10:4
10:6
[sl 93:18
96:7 96:7 96:9
47:13 59:10 138:9
207:12
billed [1) 40:6
biological
[11 90.10
37:4 37-.7
37.14 55:2
badlyg�
[ll 192:3
beginning [1] 2:16
[z) 73:18
75:15
arrow [zl 9:18
61:2
98:!
98:2 98:4 98:1 2
bag [1] 104:24
begs [1] 28:20
biological) Y[1172:24
art 6:i 194:22
204:16
balance z
[) 184:11
204:4
begun [11 109:22
Binh [3) 107:16
f
artifacts [3] 194:23
attractive [1] 48:23
attracts
balancing [ll 155:10
behalf [2] 160:24
213:23
119:7 143:23
bird 86:15
195:5 ] 95:8
[z] 63:8
81:11
bald [i) 86:23
behind [6)
[31 87:10
87-11
ascend [1] 39:1
Ash[l2] 68:19
audible [14] 10:20
balloon [3) 161:10
] 7:4
17:7 70:7 70:16
birds [1)135:10
82:15
113:15 117:18 119:6
12:10 17:19 45.15
45:16 49:9 50:22
161:11 161:12
band 63:22
118:13 141:14
belief [2]
Birdsall[a] 68:16
70:15 118:13
119:10 122:6 122:13
122:13 122:22 123:3
51:4 51:13 51:17
[i]
Band-aid[i) 157:7
56.17
215.10
180:18
bit181 5:7 79:4
147:7
51:19 119:21 120:1
121:22
bands [1] 62:21
believes [1) 134:15
81:5 113:18 143:14
asks [1) 68:5
audibly
bang [1] 53:19
belonging
g� g [ll 105:23
143:15 157:11 171:23
aspect [2] 62:18
auditorium 131 3 224
banks [1) 145:5
below
Sw [ 75:7
Blackie
39:16 [2) 38.21
112:17
3:24 141:9
barp] 15:17
150:10
163:2
blacktop
aspects [1) 145:20
asphalt
audito ry [3) 20:8
118:20
Barb [21 80:24 81:7
benchmark [ll 42:11
50:10 9 8 90:13
[1] 146:4
153:14
Barbara [2) 65:8
beneath [1] 103:11
200:4
assertions [z) 23:24
27:23
August [3] ]:g
80:18
benefit 1
[
blacktopping [3)
'
18:6 176:19
barely [11 16:7
] 178:9
fits [15
b52
88:19 89:20 199:22
assess [1] 10:15
authors [3] 60:13
barrelled [t] 87:3
14:6
9
blanket [1) 126:22
assessment [2] 46:14
71:17 76:2
barrier[4] 112:16
112:13 166:23 167:4
block [a) 22:18
167:21
auto [1] 53:24
129:16 182:4 182:5
176:11 176:14 197:9
115:20 119:5 136.24
assistance [i] 134:5
automobiles [ll
barriers [al 21:23
197:11 197:22 198-8
blocked [1) 69:14
associated [a] 32:14
35:22
43:16 48:22 181:20
Bernard [1] 124:19
blocks [3] ] )5:22
33:5 167:16 198:13
automotive [1] 113:1
Bartone [3) 184:2
best [7) 10:15 60:8
118:18 193:9
Associates [1] 11:23
autos [11 145.3
191:11 192:22
84:20 86:10 '161:9
blood [1) 6i18
association [4) 77:21
available [i] 84t1
Bartwitz [3) 65:8
207:2 215:10
blooms 11) 139:22
82:18 88:9 147:20
130:5 160:8 170:23
80:18 80-24
betterpq 41:6
blue[3] 82:18 82:24
assume [31 29:16
184:13 184:16 197:1
base [2] 63:1 155:1
72:20 81:10 90:7
113:11
30:13 145:9
Avenue [1] 193:5
based [6) 72:9
90:18 95:18 i 16:12
board [89l 1:1
assumed [1] 206:15
average [3) 20:5116:14
avera
6 73:5 124:7
116:17 ] 17:15
120:13 120:16 137:21
3:7 5:2 5:10
assuming[1] 150:141.72.1
20:9 179:14
161.20 179:15
144:15 152:8 177:13
8:19 13:21 24:14
assumption [3) 25:13
averaging [2] 57:17
aseline [1] 51:6
between [221 2:12
25:1731:20 41:13
43:22
25:14 74:10
assure
174:7
Aviation [2] 1:6
basic [1] 152:21
basins
33:16 51:1 51:15
54:10
44:1 44:24
47:15 47:23 48:2
[2] 108:23
62:5
[ll 91:2
56:23 83:11
49:23 51:17 54:1
'
109:3
basis [6] 4:11 69:20
102:20 110:2 112:5
55:21 67:12 67:17
At -the -Park [2] 40:11
avoid [s] 34:1
74:10 90:22 154: i
112:11 121:18 128:19
67:23 69.23 70:3
40:21
62:9 131:18 159.16
154:8
131:16 136:22 139:9
71:3 71:10 71:15
athlete 1
[ ] 91:i6
160:20 bay[lo) 59:16 59:17
140:11 145:19 145:23
71:23 75:7 77:13
avoided[1] 194:14
athletic [1] 90:3
62:7 80:2 118:22
132:1 beverages
ever 1s[1) 184:6
101: 80:22 82:22
101:7 101:21
Avon [2] 176:5
attached [1] 55:17
137:4 148:5 [1) 175:3
185:10 191.7 beyond [3l
109:10
109:19 111:9 113:6
PeRv Alexv - C',nnrt RP..nrFPr fIct QN ,c« .,��
66:5
114:8 114:14 115:8
3-58
1
Public Hearing
1
I
H
1
116:24 117:4 117:12
119:20 119:23 121:13
122:1 123:2 123:7
123:17 124:10 124:12
124:21 126:13 127-19
130:8 131:6 131:20
134:14 134:24 135:3
136:3 137:14 140:21
140:23 143:24 148:21
154:2 154:4 154:11
154:15 158:11 159:3
167:14 168:2 176:20
180:10 184:4 187:2
195:22 202:9 203:5
205:17 206:12 213:24
214:1
Board's [3] 3:14
3:20 47:2
boast [1) 132:10
boat [4] 149:10 149:17
149:17 170:5
boats (2) 205:13
205:22
Bob 111 184:4
Bobsled [291 13:14
18:8 18:24 19:3
19:10 21:4 21:12
41:3 41:7 49:8
49:10 51:8 51:10
51:12 84:17 110:7
119.13 128:11 1336
135:6 135:11 135:14
136:3 136:6 139:6
152:24 163:23 191:24
205:11
Bobsleds p1 136:4
BOD [1) 75:13
boils 11134:23
bold[i] 121:16
Bolton 12] 156:18
184:23
bombarded 111 164:1
boom [i) 63:1
Boor [3] 15:5 23:16
23:20
boos [ll 36:15 L
bordering[l) 44:20
borings [11 75:8
born [21 171:16 201:18
bother[ll _ 191:22
bothers [21 60:6
64:1 F
orana[l]
6:7
bread [ll
172:3
break [21
40:20
168:15
breakers [11
40:24
bridge [22]
5:19
7:14 7:15
7:17
7:19 7:22
12:13
27:2 27:3
27:11
27:13 27:16
28:1
28:4 31:2
35:21
35:24 36:3
58:13
58:16 88:21
119:1
bridges [2]
90:16
138:22
brief [2] 196:8
212:1
briefly [3)
105:1
uuGrS [21
145:19
buffing [1]
build 1618:21
94:24 161:3
172:20
)ottleneck [21 33:12 1 31:7 32:17
34:18 111.12
3ottom [il 140:13 built [41 74:13
,ought [s) 11:5 130:20 .137:18
79:3 104:12 208:24 bullet [i)
209:5 Bulletin [l1
loundaries [1] 186:9 burying [11
CondenseItn
2
100:1 125:7 128:
149:2 152:15 155:
173:16 178:9 203:
203:9 203:11 209:
20918 209:19 212:
businesses [9) 33:2
63:8 63:10 63:1
82:3 173:14 173:
202:6 204:5
buy [1) 96:12
buys 11] 204:14
C1121 1:18 9:13
71:20 74:13 74:1
76:12 16:13 115:
115:10 194:4 215:
3 215:3
California [11 210:1
calls [1) 20:17
camp (1) 92:1
cannot [21 58:15
126:19 [
canoe 2) 86:1
138:19
Canterbury[2] 119:7
192:24
capabilities 141 28:3
29:5 31:16 35:20
capacity [2) 6:12
158:17
capital [3) 208:1
208:17 209:3
car [41 38:24 58:18
62:22 204:15
card [11 195:14
cards [2) 27:1 g
200:7
care [31 63:20 63:20
136:21
career[3i 111:15
171:20 211:17
careers [11 212:6
carefully (3) 48:6
48:17 125:24
CondenseItn
2
100:1 125:7 128:
149:2 152:15 155:
173:16 178:9 203:
203:9 203:11 209:
20918 209:19 212:
businesses [9) 33:2
63:8 63:10 63:1
82:3 173:14 173:
202:6 204:5
buy [1) 96:12
buys 11] 204:14
C1121 1:18 9:13
71:20 74:13 74:1
76:12 16:13 115:
115:10 194:4 215:
3 215:3
California [11 210:1
calls [1) 20:17
camp (1) 92:1
cannot [21 58:15
126:19 [
canoe 2) 86:1
138:19
Canterbury[2] 119:7
192:24
capabilities 141 28:3
29:5 31:16 35:20
capacity [2) 6:12
158:17
capital [3) 208:1
208:17 209:3
car [41 38:24 58:18
62:22 204:15
card [11 195:14
cards [2) 27:1 g
200:7
care [31 63:20 63:20
136:21
career[3i 111:15
171:20 211:17
careers [11 212:6
carefully (3) 48:6
48:17 125:24
carpentry [i]
174:24
103:2
cam, [2192:22
191:20
140:10
carrying [4)
68:10
69:24 121:7
121:11
52:3
162:1.1,_
cars [171 27:1
27:2
30:23. 34:17
36:5
36:7 57:3
68:1
12:8
75:11 77:10
83:22
42:22
83:24 90:2
90:10
90:11 90:22
108:12
129:13
, Cartier[il
169:6
cartoon [1]
23:11
26:11
case [4) 3:13
36:16
2:19
85:10 140:13
123:8
cases Ili 190:6
wounds [l]
Bowl
185:18
116:2
bus [11 100:3
catapults [1]
40:9
[i]
Box 1:14
Bush 111129:18
caters [11
99:22
[11
boy 83:5
bushes 111
130:20
Catherine Ili
1:10
[11
business [281
3:18
causal [3]
51:1
Bramley [11
15:6
8:23 32:24
79:5
51:15 121:18
branch [1]
branches
185:7
]22:22
79:14 92:8
96:4 96:17
92:18
97:17
caused [s)
32:22
21:12
[l]
98:6 98:8
99:12
68:18
111:18
124:15
elr Pev Alexv
- ('�„Tr uP,,,,e, fc �l QN Cr.- ,.. , .
3-59
(1) 173:20
c (2) 129:14
14 131:2
20 Census [1) 31:3
cent 141 106:1 106:2
2 106:8 106:12
23 center[6) 33:23
59:2 126:10 148:12
169:3 203:24
certain [3] 129:3
167:16 208:1
9 certainly [121 36:19
2 54:18 93:11 93.22
3 101:8 122:23 13i6
143:11 156:5 174:20
4 188:14 208:7
CERTIFY p) 215:7
6 cetera [2] 92:16
92:17
chainsaw 11] 15:24
cbair[1] 132:8
Chairman [41) 1:9
2:2 3:20 4:5
4:22 4:23 14:15
15:1 15:12 23.12
23:16 36:11 65:14
66:4 66:12 66:16
66:20 66:23 80:17
82:11 82:21 116:6
7 116:10 124:20 133:19
134:23 135:1 135:2
144:6 151:20 168:14
168:19 169:8 171:9
184:3 191:4 191:9
196:4 207:4 210:6
213:18
challenge [2] 74:10
74:11
chance [41 8:6
79:17 82:7 201:22
change [19] 6:16
15:18 24:10 24:22
35:22 44:9 49:4
49:18 50:8 94:22
94:23 95:1 103:22
104:6 122:17 139:11
140:3 206:11 209:15
changed [lo) 13:20
21:1 44:4 84:12
87:12 137:7 139:5
146:10 152:6 164:7
changes 171 24:22
34:24 35:12 50:1
92:19 93:3 102:6
changing [3] 60:17
61:22 94:21
character[8) 45:14
45:18 104:6 122:18
128:24 130:22 132:6
167:10
characters [l) 167:18 c
charged [1] 36:14 c
charging M 106:7 c
charitable [l] 180:2 e
charities [31 92:15 c
173:14 179:24 c
Charles [1] 192-23 cl
Charlie [4] 97:14
Board's - ch
97:15 97:19 97:23
chart v] 18:11
Chazen Il]
2:7
chemical Ill
108:14
chemically 121
145:10
145:11
chemicals [l)
84:2
Chestnut [11
119:8
children 111)
53:15
54:15 99:23
100:2
104:7 108:1
124:24
129:4 136:11
173:2
191:22
,hildren's [2)
44.4
63:7 [
choice 27 54:6
206:18
choices [s) 135:7
206:7 206:9 206:16
209:21
t:uoose [si
19:21
19:21 209:21
209:22
209:24
choppijng p)
113:19
chose (3)
69:8
107:22 158:7
chosen [i]
118�3
Chris [4]
1:16
2:4 4:5
133:19
Christian [2)
165:1
193:1
Chuck [2]
56:9
60:1
circuitous [11
131:17
circulation [2)
29:7
31:18
circumnavigates [l1
33:22
-. l -Ujatdnce3 [ll
111:10
city
Claim
claims
Clark
lean
leaner
leanup
lear[6)
cite [l) 60:5
cited 11186:18
cities [l)
55:22
citizen 121
203:24
211:23
cltlZens [41
110:21
201:14 202:2
211:15
citizenship [1)
179:23
[s] 156:20
157:16
158:12 159.4
159:10
160:11 160:18
188:12
[3]
69:13
74:4 76:2
[4)
69:21
74:6 122:8
122:16
[l]
138:7
lash [1)184:6
lass [1153:5
lassie [1]
184:6
Ill 142:16
[11
15:22
111
183:15
54:11
118:1
18:20 119:10
131:9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Public Hearing
CondenseIti"
138:24
183:23
Clear-cut - conveniew
clear-cut [z) 131:8
coloredpi
[) 8:4
community's [)
167:19
196:1 199:22
constructed [al 162.10
145:24
clear -cutting [sl
combination p)
commuters [z) 30:13
Concernin g [11 150:9 185:11 187:12 189;12
concerns
147:15 165:8 147:19
) 3; [ g
Comet
30:16
[zs) 13:7
construction [12l
147:24 165:24
[3l 44:3
69:5 163:22
companies [z) 2:7
173:19
80:10 102:i7 103:15 142:11 142:21 143:9
clearcutting [1)140:1
cleared 162:70
comfort [1] 26:7
company [s) 115:17
109:8 112:18 122:6
126:20 140:6 144:12
174:24 184:21 188:4
189:11 194:14
[i)
clearing [z) 49:4
Comfortably141:1
[1)
141:6 176:22
194:17
153:9 155:5 156:3 consult [1)
162:4
140:14
comingp� 11:6
180:12
comparative
p [zl
156:9 158:14 163:17 755:24
173:20 176:8 163:17 consultant M 2:8
clearly [a) 4:13
26:19 40:24 53:18
46:13 120:9
196:16 197:15 213:22 11:I5 11:15 11:23
64:14
15:13 64:16 196:21
Cleverdale [11 185:10
57:18 58:8 58:10
58:15 84:3 102:15
compare [z] 17:21
41:3
121:4 ) 34;6
concert [3) . 164:20
164:23 165:1 consultants [71 66:1
clogged [il 61:6
106:11 116:4 141:17 compared z 40:16
[)
concerts [i) 25:3
96:5
close [zo] 3:15
141:21 163:20 182:24 161 5
7 1
147:1 175 :1 8
concessions [i)183:12
118-7
21321
compares [1) 73:20
conclude [ll 60:8
contact [i)
159:2
134:1 135:7 15924
187:5 213:19 2149
comment [331 2:10
2:23 3:1 3:2
comparison [z) 69:2
73:16
contained [1) 37:16
concluded [3l 164:5 contains [2)
closed 131 18:13
3:2 3:7 3:15
166:22 214:12
48:5
114:4
26:3 135:17
3:17 48:3 48:9
compel [l] 119:24 conclusion [s) 43:18
contaminate
closer [1) 122:19
66:6 66:8 66:13
114:3 114:10
competent [il 64.14
45:23 121:17 122:1
167:1
[11
192:20
closest y) 107:19
114:16
114:19 116:9 128:6
competitive [z) 37:5
37:18
Conclusions [s) 20:13
contaminated [il
Closing [2) 35:14
100:16
134:2 134:11 134:17
151:15 169:1 176:7
compile [i) 114:4
24:3 30.2 72:4
72:16
192:6
contamination [il
club [6) 43:7 59:15
128:14 162:17
190,10 196:9 196:11
198:15 212:13 213:19
Complain [s) 68:21 147:4
110:10 205:18 205:23 concrete pl 121:15 contemplated
162:
162:19
2142 214:4
206:1
pl
condition [il 121:15 121:20
clusters [il 50:10
commentary [2)
com lained [3) 89:24
P
conditions 131 45:24
126:16
contemporaneous
CNA pl 42:22
27:21 65:19
110:12 119:15
126:17
[1)
188:17
co -directors 80:24
comments [12) 2:14
complaining [3]
20:18
Confidence(]] 43:20
context pl 42:16
[i)
Coach [8] 5:21
37:19 48:8 78:11
112:4 114:22 124:5
136:2 205:21
complaint 118:15
conflict [z) 152:1
165:9
contiguous 121 188:19
6:8 8:11 22:3
22:20 67:19 112:6
134:3 152:6 196:8
197:3 212:11
[i)
complaints [z) 59:13
confused [il 154:10
189:16
continuall Y [ll 37:6
112:12
commerce [ll 141:15
69:12
complete s 2:16
p [)
on [ con estia
g ) 8:16
45:11 52:17 60:19
Continue [131 36:17
coast [i)104:3
commercial [2) 64:22
151:4 173:23 190:3
Connected [3) 73:14
60:4 103:16 111:6
144:6 153:16
coasterps) 21:7
38:9 40:20 42:2
184:7
commingle [1) 127:10
195:2
completed [i) 6:9
86:22 187:14
connecting 166:13
168:24
168:24 175:24 202:8
202:10 202:12 210:3
92:19 92:14 94:3
94:24
committed [31 51:6
Completely [3] 68:17
121
188:14
continued 01 37:13
94:24 139:24 146:22
139:2 146:2
205:8 213:6
75:4 151:5
conscious z 54:6
[ )
98:6 172:23 173:16
147:12 147:17 164:13
common [61 77:2
compliance pi 55:23
168:3
201:11 201:20 213:13
170:9 170:10
77:4 77:8 87:3
complicated [i)
consequences p)
continues yl 181:13
coasters p] 42:5
151:3 159:4
114:5
442
continuing [3) 97:18
code [3l 19:24 77:10
communications [ll
Comply[') 194:10
Conservation [3)
173:17 202:7
111:12
] 75:8
Communities
components [i)134:9
74:6
conservative
continuous [4] 38:8
53:9
codes [1] 199:17
[2]
111:20 213:16
compromised [i)
y)
31:9
108:22 108:22
Coexist [zl l 12:18
47:7
continuously [1)
155:17
cOM-Munity[s8)1:17
2:4
computer [s) 22:7
considerpi) 64:1
179:22
coined p)-144:11
5:4 24:) 2
28:6 37:21 41:18 •-.
161:24 162:6 775:15
68:8 86:20 114:9
121:5 123:8
contract [il 56:21
COlIIS (2) 149:23
150:1
43:3 45:14 47:20
48:12
184:14
Concentrating
144:23
186:18 187:20 189:19
contradiction [ll
136:8
59.24 67:6
[il
203:5
cold [il 149:15
67:7 81:4 81:6
26:5
considerable [3]
55 tradictions [il
collected [i) 91:1
81:17 81:22 82:5
concern [171 56:6
36:24 73:11 108:16
collection [zl 67:24
82:6 97:22 98:12
107:8
65:18 105:3 112:7
consideration a
[)
contraindications [i)
91:2
123:5 127:6
127:18 152:16 152:18
125:3 128:7 131:10
131:11 153:1 156:11
186: 47:16 186:]
186:15
67:3
contrary
c17
ollector[is) 28:13
28:14 28:16 28:23
152:19 153:3 153:8
155:14 167:17 173:1
159:19 160:22 165:6
166:6 192:5 193:24
considered [io) 21:23
contribute [ll 153:6
Bute 153:6
29:5 29:10 29:11
173:9 173:12 175:23
199:14
48:22 123:13 129:1
contributory) 63:11
29:15 29:24 30:17
177:12 177:14 179:19
concerned [27] 11:4
129:6 129:15 130:16
control [il 111:22
30:20 31:16 31:23
179:23 183:1 183:12
102:18 102:20 102:22
131:20 154:16 186:23
controlled [2l 60:14
32:4 57:6
198:24 199:20 200:14
102:23 103:1 103:2
considers [21 50:18
149:5
College [il 81:22
201:1 201:5 201:12
201:17 202:3
103:2 108:10 129:21
127:20
controls [il 126:13
Collins CA 4:21
5:1 5:4
202:7
202:21 203:10 203:10
144:24 145:13 162:16
162:22 163:19 164:3
conspicuously [z]
27:4 27:20
controversy [il 167:23
13:3
14lo 12j 1)0:9
204:24 20723 212A
171:4 181:b 181:7
constantl 141:11
convenient[il 33:8
Colonel [zl 176:4
181:8 193:14 193:15
193:20 194:23 195:21
[;1)
construct i 160:24
conveniently[,]
70:16
Peggry Alexv - Onnrt 1RP,.,.,
3-60
Public Hearing
CondenseItr`
convening[1) 125:18
converted 111 187:13
coverp] 71:14
109:20 166:14
[za122:14
converting D'
g111169o16
cooperation 159:6
coworkers [11 201:19
2:7 28:16
deemed [ll
deteriorated
[ll
craftsmen [1) 175:1
43:15 46:1 48:6
43:3
deterioration [11
coordinated 111 12:16
CRAIG [1] 1:9
49:24 72:3 72:16
deep [2] 63:1 65:18
169:13
Coordinating [ll
create [l ll 8:13
75:8 76:12 77:15
78:19
defined [11 184:20
determine [61 18:24
189:5
34:12 35:21 41:18
114:5 114:21 definite [11 89:9
120:9 120:13 120:16
29:14 29:22 65:23
copies [ll 83:10
42:10 42:20 63:12
121:3 124:9 196:19
definitely [3) 87:18
65:24 87;6
COPY 11] 120:8
125:14 137:11 177:13
197:6
100:4 169:24
de#ermined [31 21:15
core 111 6:24
185:14
date 131 21:17 87:11
degradation 111 73:11
30:10 73:5
cornerstone [z1 27:9
created Isl 25:8
155:7 degrade [ll 111:6
detriment 11] 88:1
27:13
30:14 197:12 198:3
198:11
DATED [t1 215:17
degree [3l 24:11
detrimental [3] 8Z19
corporate [21 141:5
179:23
creating z
g [ l 35:1 S
daughters 111 131:13 196.16 197:5
DEIS 1
89:7 147:24
devalued III 181:13
corporation [67 77:11
] 84:18
creation [ll
Dave [3180:19 80:23
107:16
Delaware 158:15
M 12:5
devastate 111 128:1
80:14 132:20 132:21
176:17 208:12
130:17
creativity
David [31 91:9
deleterious [1) 75:17
devastation [11 111:17
[11 133:2
credit[']
107:14 I76:1
delivering M 56:21
developed 111 188:12
correct[5] 110:15 98:23
110:19 110:22 137:9 Creek [ll
Davie 1
[ I 65:9
delivery [ll 175:2
develo Per [11 186:3
145:14
149:11
Creighton 11:20
Dayrene [31 200:8
Delores [ll 192:24 developers [11 104:23
corrected [1) 72:15
t11 207:5 207:6
crests 111 146:22 days [71 25:23
demand [21 73:18
75:15
developing [31 10:11
128:22 144:10
correction 111 146:2
corrections 72:15
26:2
crickets [ll 146:17 26:6 114:17 129:11
demands [31 28:5
development [20)
111
corresponding [2]
51:3
critical [7] 145:2
168:6 168:11 186:8
151:16 206:3 29:7 31:18
deafening [11 128:1 ] demonstrated 1
1:17 2:5 32:21
33:4 41:14 46:3
121:20
186:10 196:23 210:1
deal 111 87:12
179.22 [ 1
59:4 76:22 115:1
corridor
corridor[s1 29:3
34:16 29:12
cross-sectional[1]
49:15
dealinga
[ ] 95:22
Denese [ll 196:6
117:10 i45:20 147:3
176:17 180:8 182:8
49:20 58:23 118:4
crossing [21 59:21
96:4 96:16 102:10
dealingsz
denigrate 111 197:10
182:10 184:7 187:23
187:24
155:21
61:10
[ l 99:2
108:17
dense[]] 166:1
188:11
cost [51 46:4 105:8
crossover[ll 90:16
Dean 11111:16
department [a1 99:6
developments [41
105:8 123:14 184:15
council [21 159:4
crosswalk 111 7:21
dear [21 193:2 194:20
99:21 182:1 198:20
depend [1]
185:1 59:12 59:20
185:15
198:17
crucial [1] 208:21
cubic
death i
[ ] 209:2
88:2
dependent 111 103:20
devour 1
[ l 1-4
counsel [2] 2:6
66:19
M 22:4
cultural
DEC [3172:20 72:22
73:7
depending
P g [ll 80:5
D 6:22 [231 1:4
36:22 50:24
counted 111 172:13
[2] 45:13
194:5
decade [3l 84:13
depth 111 74:9
56:15
68:7 69:15 76:9
Counties [11 31:12
cumulative [) 9:1
6
111:16 164:8
Derby [3) 113:14
113:15 I ] 6:7
76:15 114:3 117:11
l 17:19 120:23
countless 111 173:16
10:124 50:22189:153:23
decades[l] 92:7
describe [1] 50:19
121:17
122:15 154:3 164:3
country 181 43:7
59:15 62:7 128:14
cure 111 60:17
deceive [11 24:2
decent(l) 159:17
describes [11 40:8
164:8 164:14 164:22
166:5 166:21 168:10
136:5 140:9 162:17
curious [1] 129
decibel [7l 15:16
describing [21 55:11
194:2
162:18
current [201 24:13
25:2 26:21 32:1
16:6 16:7 19:4
70:8
description [11 185:18
dialogue [11 2:11
counts [3l 27:1
27:5 32:5
42:4 42:6 45:1
41:11 50:7 64:2
d ecibels[l7l 15:11
deserves M 25:16
Diane [zl 149:6
149:7
coun zz 33:23
ty [ 1
45:22 46:21 47:14
52:7 72:6 73:2
15:16 15:18 ] 5:20
design [41 42:4
Dick 111 12:2
34:5 34:8 99:6
76:10 111:11 122:17
15:21 16:2 16:9
175:5 175:8 185:6
dictates [3] 77:2
99:11 99:21 148:12
144:22 144:24 145:2
16:17 17:23 18:15
designated[11 186:10
77:5 77:8
176:17 177:6 178:3
164:10
18:17 18:19 18:20
designed [41 12:12
Diddio 111 196:6
178:21 180:5 180:8
184:17 184:18 - 186:9
cursory 127 27:15 ._
20:6 21:8 21:11
55:3
38:11 39:14 139:24
die 121 208:19 209:2
199:21 199:24
47:21
decide [2l 96:9
designers [27 39:9
133:3
difference [r1 16:10
08:7
]99:5 199:9 208:9
customer [ll 52:5
134:I5
despite
16:11 17:22 18:18
18:21
couple[io1 12:24
customers [1) 29:18
decided[21 171:22
145 [21 54 24
20:16 128:18
13:5 41:1 83:10
150:8
cut pi 56:24 130:21
183:8
a ions[zl
stindeciding
different II s1 4:15
163:4 174:19
189:21 209:21 211:1
210:7
cutting 122:21
[1) 144:17
2 8:18 28:21
61:20 92:15 93:53
course[6] 84:17 .
[2]
130:1
decision [41 60:10
destroy
Y[zl 64:11
101:] 14]:23
128:13 136:8 184:9
18
185:19 187:6
cycle pj 60:18 60:22
decisions 18 124:14
destroyed 194:24
09:24
12:3 113:1 209:24
212:24 213:1
courses 91:24
61;4
d 1:
y [z1163:23 206:10
deck [21 91:9 192:23
111
destruction [2] 194:24
difficult [21 38:23
court [31189:24 190:7
190:8
Dale [2l 128:3 165:8
decline [1) 144:20
decorations 111 175:14
111:21
detail
127:11
difficulties [11 111:3
Courthouse[g] 14:24
damage [31 112:7
144:15 190:17
decrease [21 32:23
[21 8:7
46:12
digest 137 65:21
17:2 17:14 17:22
19.2 19:3 21:7
damaging [z1 136:13
128:17
decreased [11 109:16
detailed [11 32.3 78:12 196:12
DiMartino [31 176:4
details [2l
22:10 55:3
] 53:I5
dangerous 58:12
decreases [11 54:17
55:11
108:18
180:16 180:18 ►
Cove [1] 80:7
[11
Darien
decreasing[31 46:21
detectable [11 20:15 Dineen [3l 82:14
91:8
[ll 76:24
detective [ll 175:14
91:10
Peunv A1P:v - r ^. rr 1De..,.4..- ic, O, ^I- .
3-61
I
0
0
1
Public Hearing
direct [6] 10:16
2817 30:23
dive [i) 149:23
Condenselt""
doubt [21 88:18
direct - end
37:18
111:21 165:9
dock [z) 135:19 147:16
130:21
dump m
P g [il 139*18
efforts [3) 155:7
directed [�) 213:8
doctor's [i) 198:6 down [281 11:19
Dunham s [1, 185:10
Dupuis
163:12 207:15
directing [11 39:9
document 1441 12:20 22:20 25:20 34:23
13:5 57:10 79:24
[1, 19224
during
egreSS [i ) 28:7
direction [5) 44:6
18:22 27:18 80:2
29:14 35:11 47:1 80:6 96:1 96:21
g [14) 25:23 eight [3183:5 98:20
26:1 263 26:8 129A
53:18 62:10 89:19
129:20
49:11 50:3 50:12 102:15 115:22 130:1
30:4 52:6 53:10 EIS [io) 2:8 5:15
directly (3) 4:14
50:17 50:20 50:24 135:19 150:1 162:19. 53:16 143:2 165:1
52:1 53:9 53:21 169:13 171.5 169:7 167:13 194:14 208:12
9:8 7:5
91:3 178:9
54:20 64:9 65:20 171:8 182:2 185:2
209:4
20:13 22:24 1
180:11 201:6
director[6) 1:16
66:24 68:11 68:12
185:6 185:21 187:8
187:21
dwelling 32:6
either[is)
2:4 172:6 200:19
201:3 212:15
69:1 69:21 70:2
71:11 72:17 75:9
188:13 210:8
downstate 180:22
E [1] 215:3
3;g
14:3
dirt[i) 176:1
83:16 84:8 87:10
[z) eagle [i) 86:24
180:24
57:10 114.7 148:10
disadvantage [i)
120:21 121:15 124:7
124:8
downtown [i) 80:3
ear131 16:4 16:12 153:24 154:11 160:2
16:13 171:8 186:23 19.4:14
83:9
134:7 134:10
151:7 156:4 156:6 Dr [z) 194:21 195:16 early [z)146:16 171:20 electric [i] 86:7
disadvantaged [i)
161:21 167:5 196:12 draft [2z) 5:8
earning [i] 211:13 electrical [6) 6:10
180:2
disagree [i) 187:18
214:6
documentary
8:17 9:5 35.11
48:4 78:5 787
78 7
ears [3) 93:22 129:10
133:4
6:12 • 12;2 1229
123:9 175:6
disappears [1] 188:3
3
[1]
38:5
78:4 78:5
78:14 78:1
ease
electricians 1 175:6
[ )
discernible [1) 53:1088
documentation [i)
] 134:16
134:4 134:13
[i) 156:2
easement
electricity [3] 142:7
discharge 72:21
discharged
45:16
documented
134:1
158:16 163:8 180:I I
187:15 209:13
1
easier 1 [) 129:10 122:11
[) 12:110 element
[i) 73:8
f
discouraged 32:24
[3142:6
45:4 47:18
209:14
drafted [i) 9:4
east [7) 32:7 62:11
119:3
3
t3i
42:17 43:4 38.23
[1)
Discovery.com [il
documents 131 42:12
68:5
drain [2)152:16 152:20
149:20 165:17
185:7 205.10
elevation 111 46:22
38:3
121:8
doesn't io
drainage [3) 148:19
eastern [i) 104:3
eligible il] 194:8
discuss [zl 60:13
94:23 95 j1 13:10
162:23 167:18
[i)
easyeliminated6:1
[z) 49:14
60:21
62:1
discussed[51 46:15
117:7 151:2 158:19
164:18 186:21 191:22
drained 111 208:14
drains z
[ 1 145:11
echo 196:9
[i) 196:9 eliminating[i) 60:21
ing[i
ecological[2) 144:18
52:12 53:3 167:7
dog [3) 146:15 192:2
lain
146:11
Elmin
179:5
discusses [1] 42:9
192:4
dollars
[
dramatic [4) 16:11
16:18 I8:2 )9:8
ecology
gY [i) 144a l
Elvis [z) 163:24
discussing [2) 49:2
] 94:16
105:14 204:23
dramatically (1)
economic[p9) 10:24
23:5 67:5
ewer
merg
emergencies [i)
185:22
dollars [24) 6:5
16:2
79:5
• 79:16 166:19 166:22
58:4
discussion [31 64:18
14:8 37:2 96:12
drastic [2] 139:10
167:4 174:3 176:11
emergency 3:22
178:13 190:3
96:13 97:16 98:20
150:3
176:14 176:17 177:11
34:12 204:]
1
discussions [i) 62.16
104:14 104:18 105:8
drastically [2) 104:7
180:5 180:8 197.9
emitted [i) 41:16
dishonest [21 60:3
105:9 174:7 174:16
139:5
197:11 202:15 202:19
emotionally [i) 36:13
60:11
177:24 178:1 178:6
178:12 178:18
draw [2) 39:11 195:17
economically [i)
emphasis [1) 199.18
disjoined [i) 27:7
179:2
179:17 207:9 204:12
drawing155:15
[s1 13:2!
emphasize [3) 55:10
dismantling [i)186:5
2:18 20:20
88 :11 195:14
economics [21 23:1
67:5 70:6
dismiss [i) 62:17
domino [i) 205:2
drawn [il 45:23
152.21
21
dis la
P Y[i) 200:]
Dons) 14:23 90:19
draws [i) 179:7
economy [3) 7913
92:75 197:16
1.15
employed z
employed [ )
disposal [41 103:19
118:14
dank [i) 192:14
Ed 12) 82:14 97:1
205:3
105:3 106:20 175:17
Donald [2] 56:10
drinking [11 192:11
editorial
employee [2) 200:18
207:9
dispose [,1 105:6
65:7
drip [11 90:21
[i) 23:11
education
disservice 11) 48:12
donated p) 92:13
drive [i�) 14:24
1) 171:21
Edwards
em to ees s 14:10
29p9 Y 17217
dissipation [i) 90:23
donating [i) 179:24
68,19 82:16 111:14
113:15
p) 176:1
effect
178:10
198:7 201:9 201:20
distance 1 119:6
[ )
donations [i) 97:23
117:18 119:6
119:11 122:6 122:13
[16) . 18:24
33:10 53:24 54:4
202.12
distances [11 141:24
done [261 9:7
122:14 122:22 123:3
54:8 54:9 54:11
employer [i) 205:7
distinct (2) 9a l
16:22 18:22 48:7
56:15
131:13 147:7 183:9
68:8 69:24 75:17
employs [i) 198:7
54:9
distinctive 39:11
73:20 88:16
92:14 92:17 116:7
192:24
Drivers ti) 61:9
88:15 89:7 125:14
126:11 130:14 162.3
em PtY [i) 94:11
[i)
distribution [i) 175:10
117:10 127:1 127:6
142:19 145:1 155:13
driving [3) 61:11 effective 151 47.13
4824
encompass [i) 147:22
encourage 111:21
district[ii) 105:17
194:4 195:3 195:3
130:23 131:17
50:7 69:16
118:9
[4)
Y08:8 210:4 214:3
105:22 158:9 178:24
179:4 184:19 185:19
195:7 195:7 195:13
196:18 200:3 206:22
dropping [1) 209:9 effectively [i) 22:18
drove[i]
encourages [i) 29:17
185:23 186:9 188:21
213:5
206:4encroachment[i)
effects [54:2 71:24
drowns [1) 135:11
102:19
188:24
districts 1 185:14
double [5l 14:8
14:11 40:18 61:11
due [61 19:10 53:13
43 19
73:17 89:13
encroachments [i)
[)
distrust [1] 60:4
178.7
71:1 75:23 76:4 effluent [7l 71:2
76:16
145:14
disturbance [i) 194:12
doubles [17 62:15
esdug
doubling 16:8
[i) 195:11
72:19 72:22 77;6
116:23 178:16 185:4
end [zz] 3:18 9:16
39:6 39:19 40:14
disturbed [i) 46:8
[3)
61:16 62:2
dump [i) 193:19 effort [6) 12:16
41:1 42:5 42:20
disturber 1 I28:11
g [)
dum ped [i) 146:5
60:7 97:18 125:5
46:5 46:15 80:2
162:23 207:[
100:10 100:16 118:10
Puv" Alexv - �' m,,+ ue,....�„_ I I o..�1 ,, .. .
3-62
I
Public Hearing
139:1
139:2
CondenseItl1"
160:2
160:3
45:10
47:74
48:5
172:' 172:7
173:24exactly
[21
11:7
187:7
Fdl
52:18
53:5
54:22
174:4 174:15
175:22
170:3
[,]
38:13
67:9
78:5
78:7
179:9 179:21
180:i 1 181:25
180:4examination
180:4
[21
[1]
176:20
78:9
79:18
78:14
78:16
150:9 181:15
181:16
47:18 155:24
endorses [1]
180:9
87:17
97:6
193:8 193:14
195.10
examined z
[ 1
129:12
ends[i] 152:15
916:15
122:16
133:24
energy [1]
175:10
134:8
134:12
134:16
201:31 2011:24
202:13 205:4
202:29
example [5]
•24:8
enforce [1]
153.16
144:12
144:15
145:15
206:15 206:24
205:7
207:9
52:24 60:18
174:19
153:5
engine [1]
180:5
146:2
146:10
147:8
210:12 210:17
211:2
examples [1]
60:6
engineer [6]
156:13 156:1
102:3
151:2
166:20
167:21
168:10
213. ] 4 212.7
212:16
excavated [1]
194:16
156:13 156:14
184:8
186:11
185:24
186:13
186:8
Escape's [61
36:22
exceed j31
20:5
engineer's [11
64:2
187:15
189:2
186:22
189:17
37:13 43:18
48:4
20:9 45:1
engineered [1]
163:6
190:6
198:12
207:21
63:4 173:15
exceeds [3]
42:7
engineering [6]
7:20
209.13 213:3
escaped [21
191:2
190:24
99:19 190:18
Excellent [1]
141:6
12:5 27:22
62:17
environmental)
Y [2)
64:3 64:7
76:18
87:14
escapes [1]
3:23
except[2]
29:2
engineers [31
63:19
envision [1]
102:15
esker p122:I9
53:19
endless - facilities
208.22
Xpect 15] 14:10
76:23 110:21 144:20
174:16
sons [1]
121 44:20
expend [1] 37:2
expense [11 152:11
expenses 14] 158:5
158:5 158:10 160:12
experience [1o] 25:19
30:22 35:3 92:3
95:3 95:17 110:5
129:9 18I:18 210:22
experienced [1124:14
experiences [1129.17
75:1 175:18
envisioned [1] 64:10
especially[7] 51:22
excess [1] 161:4
experiencin g [2]
enjoy [$] 85:18
envy [,] 123:18
54:I5 84:16 99:23
exclusion [ll 60:21
3f 45:20
132:I4 142:24 200:24
equal 1
q [1
10:22
139:9 145:20 181:20 exclusive 111 61:3
expert 2
P [7 113:21
202:17 202:17 204:I0
equally[,]
3:1
Esq t31 1:13 1:18
excuse [6] 23:2
114:20
205:15
enjoyable [11 204:6
equate [1]
1:18
135:14 essential) Y [31 26:1
38:4 89:8 107:11 expertise[zJ 133:8
178:21 195:19 196:14
enjoyed [1] 210:22
e uatic 1
q [ ]
10:22
166:6 185:8
executive [4] 1:16
._
experts 13] 114:7
enjoyingequipment
[2] 205:6
12, 108:16 established 1 127:21
[]
42:8 45:3 52:11
147:1 155:24
210:23
108:21
Erb 169:6
establishing t1] 214:7
exist [7] 35:10 118:21
119:13
expires [2] 190:4
enlarged [,] 129:24
[3] 169:9
Estates [2] 17:2
137:10 140:13
190:11
enlighten [1) 24:2
169:10
erection
22:10
173:14 181:20
existing
explain [21 60:23
enlightening [1]
[1,
I75:3
estimate [2) 72:7
1151 5:21
154:12
27.8
Eric 131 200:9 210:9
138:10
5:24 10:3 14:3
exploitation [11152:14
enormous [41 77:3
210:10
erode [1]
et [z] 92:16 92:17
21:9 33:1 46.19
74:12 122:20 162:1
explore [1] 158:22
77:4 77:7 128.20
eroding
109:22
ethnic p] 172:20
165:13 167:20 184:24
express 121 65:18
ENSR 121 12:9
[11
109:12
ethylene [11 75:11
188:5 207:19
163:16
21:5
erosion [1]
150:24
Etu [1) 151:18
exists [1] 35:19
expressed [1] 126:21
ensures [1] 173:17
errors 121
72:2
67:2
evaluate [1] 114:4
exit [1z] 3:23 25.12
expressing [1] 213:22
enter [3i33:9 34:17
39:8
Escape
evaluating[,] 63:24
2620 27:12 33:17
34:18 34:20
extend[61 39:21
entering [4] 26:12
[128]
5:6 5:16
1:4
8:19
evaluation[,] 46:11
60:20
61:10 61:14 80:3
44:12 100:6 177:9
177:9 ]85;2
26:17 36:5 75:19
20:18 24:7
25:18 25:24
24:21
26:3
evening 126] 5:2
15:7 36:14 36:21
80:4
exiting [6]
extended 161 24:17
48:10
entertainment [4]
6:20 202:20 203:1
26:13 28:8
29:4
91:11 96:24 101:20
25:8
25:14 26:19 27:1
66:15 75:4
104:10 114:15
203:8
29:19 30:15
34:2 35:3
32:8
37:1
101:23 103:7 107:15
111:13 113:10 122:3
34:1 58:6
Extending [11 24:18
enthusiasts [1, 41:20
37:5 37:23
38:20
124:22 146:16 147:6
expand [131 52:10
76:23 80:15
extension [�] 133:9
entire [s] 31:13
40:1 44:23
45:22
153:20 171:11 171:14
100*11
105:19 127:15 141:3
133:11 151:15 157:13
34:20 134:15 152:4
183:5
47:6 47:17
5821 60:5
57;9
6118
176:6 176:7 180:17
191:13 192:21 203:14
149:4 177:8 206:16
209:22
157:19 158:8 158:18
extensive
entirely[,, 168:12
62:15 63:8
78:4
64:17 -
- 212:11
209:23 210:3
expanded 44:6
[11 165:6
extent z
[ ] 63:7
entirety [1] 53:16
79:2
79:10 79:17
79:6
81:6
evenly[i] 166:19
[6]
126:12
130:9
177:7
entitled [z] 38:3
81:9 81:24
86:13
event z
187.17 ] 54:11
145:
exterior [z, 20:3
117:23
87:22 92:6
93:19
93:19
events [6) 25:11
xpa ng [3
expanding [3] 57:14
20:4
entrance 121 34:19
95:8 92:22
104:11 141:3 141:22
59:10 79:5
extinguishers [1]
61:1
100:22 101:3
101:5
163:23 1
expansion [411 5:17
174:23
entry [1] 185:12
102:7 102:10
105:7 105:21
104:12
105:24
eventually[,] 25:4
10:17 14:7 29:464:21
30:24
extra [3] 96:19 136:12
150:12
environment[is)
8:18 9:3
108:4 108:9
108:14
everybody[9] 5:2
33:1 47;3
47:10 52:2 59:7
extreme
20:8
56:1 97:11 102:9
110:9 110:14
111:10
110:19
15:8 141:10 155:17
72:8 72:12 104:22
38:4 �] 38:1
106:21 127:17 129:17
117:13
125:6 126:4
125:1
127:12
155:23 156:7 158:3
158:24 183:20
105:15 105:17 108:9
110:18 122:10
extremely [,] 92:5
133:5 139:5 140:4
144:21 164:6 167:11
127:22 129:6
132:19
everybody's [2,
124:15
126.15 132.22 124:15
extremes [11 112:19
172:16 172:22 205:9
133:2 139:10
141:20 143:1
141:2
143:8
101:11 158:4
evidencepi 54:14
146:1 151:13 155:12
168:8 174:4 176:9
F [,, 215:3
face [31 40:13 105:14
environmental159]
143:14 148:22
148:23
176:12 176:15 176:21
105:16
2:14 2:18 3:5
3:11 5:9 7:10
149:1 154:3
164:8 159:9
155:8
163:21
Evident) ,
Y [ ] 2:3
177:3 177:16 177:19
179:5 180:6
facilities [,a] 5:18
164:21 165:18
165:19
evolve [,] 134:19
180:9
188:6 207:1 207:20
8:22 32:6 38:21
45:6
PCR" Alexv - Cmnrt RP nm-r iti of cc-- nc'l.
52:4 186:6
3-63
I
H
11
Public Hearing
187:13 188:16 188:19
189:9 189:14
farmland[11 77:1
CondenseIt
finds 111133.10
facility - gentlenif
189:14
189:16
fashion [2] 34:14
57:12
fine (11 66:12
19111
food 121 81:15
frogs [1] 146:18
facility
tY 111 24:20
fast [11 40:12
finish (i] 137:22
204:14 front Is] 3:23 4:24
foods 111 15:4
fact [2516:4 17:16
19:13 24:20 26:19
faster[1] 80:12
fire 131 132:3 174:22
174:23
57:4 64: 4
foodstuff M 175:38 95:3 97:4 147: 15
26:23 36:6 50:18
fastest [1] 38:8
fireman 111 203:17
foot [22] 22:13 22:21
fronting 11]
74:24 75:9 83:22
84:10 89:2 90:9
fathom [1] 208:5
faults [1]
fires (3) 104:3 111:16
111:19
41:24 42:10
77:3 85:11 85:14
fulfill [1175:10
90:12 705:13 124:7
152:23 158:4 174:2
150:7
favor[41 78:4
Firestone 94:4
85:22 122:12 127:8 121:14
139:23 147:11 161:10 full Is) 11:2 86:4
178:17 183:7 195:8
196:19 204:11
184;10 196:22 197:8
fears [1] 153:10
fireworks 111 103:8
161:11 161:11 161:12 105:1 158:18 I72:9
162:12 164:12 169:22 full-scale
factor [2] 72:11
feasible [p] 199:7
firm [3) 12:12 27:22
38:11
[1) 40:17
169:23 182:3 full-time [111 142:9
a 11114:9
9cto
federal (sl 19:16
first [21] 4:10 4:11
142:19
foothills (1] 48:16 172:12
factors [s1 12;4
19:18 19:19 19:22
63:17 72:4 83:2
footnote (1] 18i7
177:20 198:2 198:7
198:10 205A
13:4 52:19 202:20 20:1
83:8 110:8 114:1 forbid [2] 36:5
205:6
207:11
202:20 203:2 203:2
203:4
fee [1] 157:16
114:18 122:10 132:18 135:18
fully[II I58:22
feed 111 183:13
132:21 134:5 149:8 forced [21 62:12
fun
facts 111 202:24
feet (161 15:23 38:10
149:2
fail [4] 60:23 61:4
190:15
40:18 43:1 50:5
171:13 172:116 174:58 forcing
209:4 g [1l 40:22
151:9 211:5
:9 211:5
functional
190:17
failed [21 24:16
50:6 58:18 74:5
74:9 75:7 77:6
firsthand 1 213:2
[ 1
[1) 123:10
foregoing [1) 215:7 functionin g (1] 108:24
foreseen (1]
121:12
94:24 161:4 161:15
fiscal [2] 10:24
110:18
forest 3
[ 7
fund (1] 38:6
fails [31 27:13 61:24
161:15 170:5
FEIS 3:4
166:22
fish 111 86:1
102:8
111:16 ] 11;18
funds 1
(] 82:5
190:18
failure [21 190:19
[1)
fellow [2] 170:16
fishing [s1 92:1
forestation [1] 102:20 future (12] 24:21
forester 1 28:5 47:14 48:21
[
191:6
170:18
138:24 139:1 170:5
192:10
] 111:15
forget Is)
73:3 111:5 146:14
failures [11 I90:21
faint
felt [3] 83:8 83:14
213.7
fit [11 140:14
3:21
132:17 136:23 141:9
146:20 154:19 159:17
162A 162:9
In53:19 132:7
fair[31 123:20 138:13
fen [s] 10:8 76;13
Fitzgerald [zl 68:19
187:22
form(1] 88:17
gallons z
92:22 [ ] 77:5.
148:14
fain 159:17
76:19 77:7 145:9
fences [1) 175:4
169:11
five 1241 16:9 16:16
formal Y [31 24:7
154:11
Gambles [31 107:3
Y [11
fairness [1] 155:2
festival [al 25:9
16:17 1724 1724
:
18:19 19:7 19:7
186:10
ormer z
f[ l 9:19
157:14 157:15
faith [1] 107:6
25:10 50:15 50:16
festivals 25:3
21:10 21:19 381:15
165:20
garage [3J 46:4
130:17 166:10
fallacious 111 69:21
(]
few [13] 37:3
58:7 59:8 75:13
104:24
formerly I11 62:19
Gardens 111 129:18
Falls (181 1:15
42:18
43:4 43:14 55:14
107:20 110:24
168:15 177:24 178:1
forms 111 4:15
gas 121 100:3 204:15
42:23 43:7 56:22
59:15
60:6 130:19 140:5
178:8 200:6 200:7
formulating [1175:]
gasoline (11 68:2
73:15 73:22
157:10 157:17 159:10
174:2 176:10 196:8
197:7 207:13
206:13
Fort[3] 171:19 190:23
195:12
gather[1] 57:19
162:17 162:18 171:17
185:5 185:21 198:17
field [2] 18:16 90:3
fix [1] 94:3
Fla 1 44:16
g (1
forth [4] 68:24 155:3
gathered [1] 121:4
gaudy (11 121:4
198:18 207:8
figure 161 49:16
70:11 117:22 143:17
Flags [1s] 38i7
177:1 198:12
fortunate
GEIS [sl 60:2
false 111 65:5
205:1 205:1
38:19 39:12 55:5
55:18
[11 213:7
forward
63:4 63:13 63:24
familiar (a] 9;9
30:14 196:19 207:14
f 1�s [41 27:5
56:2 76:24
95:23 99:3 99:9
(3) 38:16
143:18 168:4
64:76
general [1] 5:5
families [1] 82:4
76:10 99:7 99:20
file
100:6 137:15 140:8
140:9 140:14
foster[11 198:22
Generalizations [1)
family [11] 91:13
107:22
[1] .154:3
filed [11 2:17
209:18
211:24 212:21
fought 1
g III 111:16
found
74:21 .
137:2 161:1
172:3
fill [z] 22:22 163:1
Flags-com [11 55:7
[31 56:16
57:2 195:6
generally [2] 28:17
52:5
172:5 20b:17 206:19
206:17 061
filled [z] 74:13
flexibility (11 125:9
four [1o1 1621 21:10
generate 111 179:17
207:3
74:15
flooded 111 75:4
34:3 110:6 131:16
generated [41 75:24
r
family s [41 128:7
filling PI 102:13
flooding [1] 167:18
136:22 161:11 177:15
108:12 178:17 204:12
132:18 172:15 173:5
family -oriented III
139:7 144:13
fills [1) 204:14
floods 111 104:2
floor1114:8
212:24 213:1
Fowler[31 77:23
generates 121 25:24
79:12
17221
famous [1] 132:8
filters 111 75:18
filtration (z] 108:15
flow [11 36:7
flying
82:12 82:15
Fox (31 200:8 200:10
generating
187:13- g �] 41:9
fan [11 135:8
192:18
[1] 205:24
focus [11 197:9
200.13
Francisco 210:14
generation
6] 26:24
far[is] 42:7 61:8 final [91 3:4 78:8
86:12
folks [4198:15 99:3
[1]
frankly
2
87:16 107:5
116:16 116:21 136:14
78:13 79:17 124:13
134:8 154:13 209:16
99:8 100:14
[31 60:3
128:7 178:3
generations [1] 48:21
138:20 157:14 160:4
214:6
follow [41 40:1
free (z] 44:12 180:1
generators [21 41:4
120:19 121:12 38:24
166:23 1689 169:17 finally[4] 122:4 follow-up [1] 214:4
170:24 186:22 190:18
freeway (1] 59:1
generic [9l 5:9
163:1 179:20 199.15
194:1 following (sl 38:2
finance 1z1 200:19
frequent 111 108:6
friend
7:4 8:17 9:5
48:4 63:5
Farb 111 132:9
201:3
185: 57:4 184:1
185.8
[1l 187.18
friendl
78:8
163:8 187:15
Farm [11129:19 financial[1] 173:11 follows [2] 74:11
friendships 1 172:21
P [ I gentlemen [Zl 121:9
Peggv Ali -Tv - o. «,, .11.
212:10
3-64
Public Hearing
36) 96;20
l
oa[3) 8:20 20:3
CondenseItr"
62:152448633
George-
65:7 77:2278:23
0:7g2Georga
63:8
64:17 78:4 79:2
:4 32:13
Havil:
and[2] 62937:11
79:1 91:8 91:21
goals [21167:20 211:18
79:6 79:10 79:17
45:8
47:6 50:5
:]Re,:
131:23
92:3 92:7 98:13
God [1) 36:5
81:6 81:9 81:24
51:2
51:15 52:6 52:21
havoc [17 111:18
101:18 101:24 101:24
105:22 141:19 156:17
goes [23l 7:2 7:1 j
20:6 28:22
86:13 87:2 87:12
53:7 99:10 99:11
Hayes 12l 149:6
169:19 182:21 182:21
50:24
53:11 53:22 67:4
95:82 99:22 100:18
173:17 201:11 202'41
headed
185:3 185:4 186:11
187:6 187:9 187:19
81:20 87:19 96:2
96:3 136:19
100:22 100:24 101:2
101:3 101:5 102:6
202:19 203:2 203:3
203:7
[3l 61:17
103:23 206:5
188:14 188:21 190:22
157:13
168:10 170:24 ) 71:5 102:10 104:12 105:7
203:8 212:3
213: ] 3 •
heading 3
g [ ] 35:23
205:11 205:13 205:16 ) 75:21 182: ) 8 171:23 105:21 105:24 107:24
205:20 208:1 188:9 188:13 108:4 108:9 108:14
guess s
t g [ ]]
i95.20
148:5 215:8
headquarters
206:22 110:9 110:14 110:19
giant [2) 24:24 146:23 golf [31 59:14 91:24
:10 10:3
210:15
dQuarters [1)
Gilbert [3) 200:9
128:13
] 11:10 117:13 125:1
125:3 125:6 125:10
guest [11204:14
headwater [1] 186:12
210:9 210:10
Goliath [1) 38:7
126:4 ] 27:12 127:13
guests [1) 6:22
health [s] 54:3
girl [11 148:24
gone [6) 95:22 97:5
127:22 129:6 132:19
guidelines
54:1 54:1l 54:13
given [11) 31:3
140:18 148:24 I55:1
]32:19 ]33:2 139:10
6 19:19
198:20 198:22 198:8
31:6 31:8 31A1
31:14 34:7 77:10
169:13
good[41) 5:1
141:2 141:5 141:20
143:1 143:8 143:14
19:22 20:12 206:22
213:4
Health 1
Y[ ] 198:19
91:17 101:5 210:15
15:7 36:21 91:10
14822 148:23 149:1
it
guilty [1]
hear [2532:1 2:2
211:4
giving
g [ s] 82
92:12 96:10 96:24
101:20 103:13 105:10
154:2 155:8 157.8
159:9 159:11 16321
79:23
Gurney [16) 27:16
94:1 95:5 103:7
103:9 I20:5 121:24
.18
101:22 114:9 122:I
126:22
107:6 107:7 ) 07;1 j
11I:13 115A
164:21 165:18 16519
172:3 172:7 17315
27:19 27:24 29:11
30:22 33:13 33:16
135:9 136:16 147:9
147:10 147:14
glad[2l 201:15 202:1
127:18
142:6 142:6 147:6
173:24 174:4 17415
34:3 35:16 35:20
56:24
165:19
170:6 170:11 182:6
gladly
g Y [1] 120:5
153:20 168:2 170:5
171:11 176:6
175:22 176:9 178:11
179:7 179:11 179:21
58:6 58:8
58:17 199:6 199:12
183:10.a91:21 182:6
205:11
glances [1) 27:15
179:22
180:17 191:13 191:24
180:4 180:9 181:15
guys [sl 82:20 94:2
-_205:12 205:13
205:14 205:14
glass [2) 105:1 192:16
192:12 192:21 201:12
195:10 193:1 100:13
150:5 150:11
heard [21) 13:7
Glen [ssl 10:7
201:12 203:14 203:23
204:3
195:10 198:11 200:18
200:19 201:3 201:24
habits
habits [1) 24.9
]3:24 39:13 53:17
17:1 17:3 17:10
17:12 28:23 33:12
211:4 211:7
204:8 217:9 211:22
202:2 202:13 202:14
Hal [4l 207:1 203:12
203:15 207:17
81:3 99:14 119:14
119:14 135:5 135:24
33:16 33:18 43:6
212.12
203:19 203:22 203:24
204:2 204:3 205:4
half [151 58:16 63:1
142:4 158:15 164:19
57:2 62:5 689
nods
g [3) 177:17
178:6
205:7 206:15 206:24
64:14 98:20 104:14
176:7 176:10 182:15
182:17 183:2
68:20 69:9 6911
69:18 69:22 70:9
179:13
Gowen [1] 111:14
207:9 210:12 210:17
211:2 211:7 212:6
104:18 105:9 106:10
106:23 106:24 137.18
183A
203:3 212:17
70:22 71:4 72:23
GPD [3l 72:6 72:8
212:16 213:14
138:12 182:6 200:14
hearing [11) 1:3
73:4 73:19 74:16
7:27:8 76:1 ]
72:13
9reater[5) 30.22
200.22
hall
69:19 133:22 136:103
76:19 77:21 82A 6
grab [1l 39:15
34:16 90:24 145:18
203:24
141 6820 107:10
163:5 214:2
139:14 139:19 165:2
82:17 85:9 85:10
86:20 88:7 88:8
grabbed [1) 104:19eatl
grade [2) 74:5
greatly [1] 113:3
Halliday
Y (3) 200:8
214:11
hearings
89:10 102:22 106:20
75:7
green [ ] s 9:13
203:13 203:15
[2) 97:6
] 14:14
107:18 109:5 111:15
grading [2] 49:5
33:20 36:8 61:2
h
hamlet 2
[ ] 184:23
heart [3) 173:7 194:21
113:12 113:16 116:20
74:2
103:21
185:1
198:19
117:3 117:24 118:4
graduated [1] 171:18
Greene [1) 192:23
hand (2) 27:12 116:4
heat [1) 131:3
120:2 120:15 121:6
122:6 122:14 122:22
d
grandchildren [2)
Greenwood [2) 48:1
handle [5) 28:5
Heaven [1) 135:18
123:3 124:23 135:9
792:2 192:4
53:14
Greisler[1) 1:19
31:24 57:22 84:6
127:17
heavily
ll Y [4) 46:15
137:1 137:3 138:8
grant [1)111:10
handled [il
124:17 130:10 165:13
138:23 143:23 147:7
148:4
granted [2) 114:14
grew [3) 112:23 149:8
171:17
73:14
handling
heavy[,,
148:7 149:8
150:13 152:2 � 153:4
123:1
graphic grossest [1) 24:1
[11 52:14
ha nds [3) 83:1
40:18
height [9l 40:18
42:1 42:22
153:21 153:22 153:23
159:12 161:1 169:11
[1) 175:8
grassed [1) 89:23
ground [3] 71:14
83:21
111:23 196:3
happening
PP
50:6
55:12 1153:16
161:4
180:18 180:19 181:6
183:16
gravel [2) 74:14
91:3
groundwater
g [2] 94:7 9
125A
161:12 :12
Helen
186:12 186:12
191:14 192:6 192:11
115:17
Graves 147:7
[9]
happy [57 144:3
20022
[1l 183:23
hell [1l 64:20 -
192:14 192:20 193:21
[1)
gravity [1] 160:14
74:110:19 74:42 74;74
75:20 84:4 89:11
202:5 206:19
206:19
Hello 1
[ ] 210:10
Glens [1a) 1:15
42:23 43:7 56:22
great [1so) 1:4 group 151 11:14 hard [1o) 6:24 9:3 help [10)12:23 15:2
82:1
59:15 73:15 73:22
5;6 ' 5:16 8:19
20:17 24:7 24:21
11:17 70:11 97:4
199:1
11:11 12:17 13:8
96:22 109:14 143:10
82:10 109:11
112:21 117:14 127:24
157:10 157:17 159:10
162:17 162:18 171:17
25;18 25:24 26:3 grow [10)
26:13 28:8 hardl
147:20 198:4
183:14 183:14
helpful
185:5 185:21 198:17
198:18 207:8
29:4
29:18 30:15 32 :8
8:12
6:17 7:8 :22 3'[1) 26:6 [1l 9;9
52:10 79:2 101:15 hardware 175:7 helping [2] 82:2
Glenwood [1) 62:7
34:2 35:3 36:22
37:1 37:5
[1)
179:1 202:7 210:19 harm [1)15110
172:19
glow [1l 103:7
37:12 helps:[11201:17
37:23 40:1 43:18 growing [1) 28:6 harms [1) 54:16
glycol [1) 75: ])
44:23 45:22 47:6 grown [2] 103:12 Harrington [31 65.9
Hence [1) 131:17
go-cart [1) 62:23
47:17 48:4 57:9
124:24
80:19 80:23 Henry 12l 190:23
58:21 60:5 61:17 growth [29] 9:2 Hart en 1 195:13
g [ ] 11.22
Peggy .Alexy - Court Rennrter !il RI e
Herb
[21143:21 143:22
3-65
Public Hearing
hereb y[j 215:7
132:13 137.22 143.14
CondenseItr`
i.e[2)
hereby
hereof [ll 215:9 137:17 137:22 143:18
129.3 130.24
IBC 208:13
impersonator[i)
22:8 22.15 y29�Pu
Hi [6) 82:15 123.23 184:12 192:11 195:22
128:5 149:7 151:24 202:9 202:15 205:5
[i) 163:24
idea [3] 15:19 115:13 implementing [2]
31:10 44:21 51:4
51:16
163:14
hopefully [2) 6:14
195:9
128:22 180:12
51:19 52:22
55:3 70:24 72:10
high [ls)1:6 15:24 80:8
ideas [i)127:11
implications [z)
76:3 76A 84;2
35:17 38:10 42:13 hoping [11 175:24
identified [41 166:6
32:15 47:19
97:16 106:18 107:11
58:14 67:14 77:3
horizontal) Y [ll
166:8 199:1 199:6 implied M 47:4
113:2 121:1 121:21
82:3 95:1 96:5
143:9 171:19 187:3
40:16
identify [31 14:19 important [iz) 14:13
70:9
129:22 140:3 145:18
163:20 174:9
187:7 187:10 189:24 homed i
[) 87:2
190:7 Hospital
199:3 16:13 71:9 95:7
ignored [z) 30:12 115:4 117:21 120:19
174:11
increased [151 28:22
high-rises [i) 188:11
12l 171:17
] 98:18
hosted
68:I7
illustrations
123:] 8 152:13 162:14
172:10 173:8
34:9 49:2 53:8
93:6 93:7 93:7
higher[s) 81:10
[I) 169:2
hotel 5:21
i
[ 1
49:15
importantly[2)91:14
94:9 139:4 139:18
139:22 140:1
85:22 95:19 116:21
122:12
[s] 8:12
11:10 22:13 194:8
103.18
Imagination [I)108:3
165:22 199:9 144;19
highly [2) 59:8
194.16 195:1 204:14 imagine [4) 39:4
impossible 121 58:11
131:]4
increases [9) 15:18
]87:10
42:23 78:17 126.19
hotels [z) 173:13 impressed [1] 197:4
182:22 immediate gg;20
16:1 53:6 54:24
64:9 81:12 105:20
Hi hwa
B y[,] 181:24
Hilands
hour[io)26:4 26:12
[i)
immediately[s)
improve [I1] 37:6
45:17
113:1 177:23
[i) 52:23
hill[i4) 17:4
76:14 87:8 111:1
45:18 45:20
45:24 52:4
increasing [6) 36:4
57:15
17:7
49:1 l 57:2 69:14
38:11 39:2 42:3°
54:19 94:18
118:22 158:21
impact [io31 2:15
68:3
95:16 197:24 199:2
83:23 182:10
182:11 203:3
69:16 70:16 80:1
89:19 118:8 118:14
hours [n) 24:17
2:15 3:5 3:11
209:4
improved 45:9
incredible[i) 89:5
118:18 119:4 149:13
24.18 39:24 44:7
5:9 7:10 8:18
9:2
[3)
67:8 67:20
incrementally [I]
hills [3) 40:19 70:7
136:18
44:13 44:13 45:1
45:2 90:12 90:12
9:5 10.17
11:15 17:19 238
Improvement [2)
126:14
incumbent [i) I34:4
hillside [i) 22:2
90:12 104:8 104:10
129:3 129:4 138:12
24:10 25:22 28:12
29:9 42:11 42:14
157:1 209:16
Improvements [s)
Incurredill
[ l 1222
Hinckley 121 74:7
143:2
43:2 45:5 45:18
34:15 94:3 98:21
indeed [2) 30:18
74:8
house [1s) 5:22
48:5 49:9 50:22
98:24 208:23
132:12
hire
[I) 66:2
6:8 8:11 22:3
51:13 62:1 62:4
improves [i) 67:15
independent [21
hired
[1) 2:8
22.21 27:17 51:21
67:20 103:12
63:24 64:6 64:12
64:19 64:20 66:3
64:4
Improving 111 198.23
196:17 196:24
indicate
hisses
[I) 36:16
112:6
112:12 135:17 165:2
71:5 77:4
inadequacies [IJ
120:)0
[11 72:5
indicated 57:6
Historic
[3) 194:10
181:10 206:2
77:7 78:6 787
(21
57:17
194:11 194:19
households [i) 118:20
78:16 79:63
i 118 quate [z) 60:2
indicates 46:6
historical
[11 10:21
houses [i) 68:15
79:16
79:18 83:14 85:4
incapable 136:7
[1)
Indication [I] 41:5
history[2)
97:13
97:15
housing[3) 32:5
85:5 85:16 85:23
[I)
incidentally
incidentally[3)70:17
indirect[2) 9:1
hit [i) 148:13
52:23 59.4
Howe [3) 169:6
86:2 86:6 86:9
87:19 95:)4
7 44:3 146y
include
10:16
individual [3) 159:2
Hoffman [i) 196:7
171:10 171:15
100:5
121:1 101:14 101:15
121:1 121:10
1101 30:19
53:5 68:I1 68:13
173:13 173:22
hold [i) 211:11
HUD [i)20:7
122:16
123:4 130:8 131.20
76:10 157:18 164.14
individuals [I) 4:9
holdings[i) 102:7
HUDSs[1] 20:3
134:8 134:12 134:16
186:9 190:5 199:18
indoor[i) 129:9
Hole [i) 92:16
Hudson [,1 188.15
135:22 145:21 150:6
included [211 3:3
induce [I) 187:23
home [i3] 30:10
huge [7] 83:9 84:23
150:24 155:14 161:20
43:15 44:11 44:15
induction [t) 38:14
30:18 31:20 63:23
70:18 103:4
85:3 85:23 87:23
99:1
163:163:11 166:12
166:4 166:7 166:20
86:7 70:22 86:23
:24 87:2 114:24
industrial [I) 10820
119:10
128:12 132:10 133:11
151:6
Hughes 151:21
68:1 168:9 173:9
126:6 157:23 158:2
industry [n 37:24
153:22 161:3 172:5
[3)
151:22 151:24
174:3 176:24 177:12
158:2 164:4 185:13
52:9 141:11 152:15
homeowner [i) 200:20
hum [11 146:18
177:16 178:15 180:14
187:15 198:12 199:16
185:17 185:19 186:4
186:7 214:6
177:6 177:8 208:21
ineffective [I) 41:8
homes [9) 62:11
70:11 70:20
human 141 54:13
199:19 200:4 201:7
includes [31 70:17
inextricably [z]
71:4
99:13 99:15 99:17
54:16 62:18 172.6
hundred
202:19 206:21 207:21
209:10 209:13 213:14
70:20 185:6
including
188:18 189:15
109:14 161:1
121 3g:)g
161:15
impacted [6) 57:8
g [9) 5:18
6:6
informal) y[,) 154:12
Hometown p) 172:2
hundreds [i) 172:14
70:23 74:2 85:8
55:12 70:14
112:2 131:22 134:17
information [3]12:21
homework [i) 104:19
honest) Y [1] 201:10
hurt [31 32:20 32:24
171;6
85:9 85:11
im actin
P [t) 1:6
184:20 186:2
inclusion
38:2 54:2
infiastr37:10 [4)
hooded [I) 87:3
husband [2) 171:22
2
pacts [a) 7
[3) 20:24
71:3 I94:9
35:9 7:10 47:3
52:3
hook [3) 156:20 157:9
181:11
10:13 10:19 10:24
24:12 25:8
inclusive [1) 174:21
ingredient [I) 75:11
760:12
hydrocarbons [s)
35:1
45:11 45:14 45:21
incompetentru
in
ingress [I) 28:7
hooked [2] I60:10
75:19 75:20 75:23
47:21 51:4 51:6
60:11
initial [I) 37:19
160:18
77:9 84:3
63:14 67:7 67:10
incorporated [2)
inlet [3) 118:21
hooking [21 32:18
1-87 [n) 9:15 26:20
124:15 160:22 166:24
9523 124:9
119.1
147:17
) 59:9
27:3 27:12 35:16
167:3 188:7 189:19
Incorrect [1] 121:24
hope [16] 13:23
43:10 46:18 58:6
202:14 203:6
increase [34] 16:3
inner [I)112:24
24:15 40:18 96:21
60:19 61:13 62:2 impede 36:7
16:6 16:18 )g;1 innocently[i) 24:16
85:2 118:3
18:2 19:4 19:9 Input [1166:4
PeRzv Alexv - (`on,t RPnAr+nr act Q� �c�_�<�
3-66
Public Hearing
'
inquire (p1 55:21
3ves 208:17
insignificant [1) investments
CondenseItr"
John Is] I:10 1:18
138:4 143:20 149:6 » - - leak
166:24
(11109:12
5:4 12:15 110:9
151:18 151:21 74:12 50:2
installation [21 49:6
involuntarily74:9
164:1 [1)
Johnston [i) 11:21
163:13
169:5 169:9 171:10 74:13 74:19
174:22
installed [1) I60:15
join [1] 201:23
involved (9) 37:20 judgment [1)
176:1 180:16 183:22
189:21 191:1 191:10
i02:7 125:15 130:1
'
installing [11 40:2
39:3 47:21 g4;23
88:8 47:7 84-23
3:10
judgments [,I 3:8
192:22 196:5 200:6
192:22 196:5
130:2 130:15 138.2(
138:22 140:10 149:11
instance [1) 146:3 183:17 201:13
jumps [1) 97:8
210:6
212:8
150:21 160:17 .162:1 I
instanceslll 90:8
involves June
[1) 83:18 (7111:3 31:7
165:21 171:4 171:5
labor[21100:11 175:2 193:11 194:6
'
instead 14) 27:6
involving IU 164:15
99:23 107:9 193:1
193:3
lack [41 65:18 152:24 lands s
[)
193:4
63:6 115:14 130:14 IrregardleSs (1) 39:18 le [2) 138:20
instills irreversible J138
153:] 153:7
ladies
96:12 101:1 ]04:13
104:
[,1 43:19 [11 124:16 22 [z] 121:8 191:3
'
instruction 1 63:16 island 4
[ 1 [ ] 162:20 Kalamazoo[1) 107:21
instructions p1121.13 181:18 182:1 194:22
212:9
lady[1) 148:3
landscape [11 50:10
landsca in
islands
Kanonik [11 12:11
Lafountain's
4 49:18
)
p142
instruments [1164:7
[1) 130:19
Kansas
[,l
81:20
49:19 19 175:5
insurance [2] 197:23
198:8
isolate [11 145:1
isolated
[1) 95c21
Karen rn 47:24
lake
lane 126127:13 27:16
27:19
insured 1,1 31:2
2
[ ] 13:11
190:19
151:23 163:13 163:14
169:6 171:10 171:15
[1s11 9:20
10:8 14:24 17:1
17:3
27:24 28:4
28:11 29:11 30:22
33:13
integrated (11 5.20
issue[lo) 12:7
Kathleen[il 111.14
17:10 17:12 33:17 35:4
28:24 33:12 35:15 35:17
intelligent [21 161:18 12:11 13:22 53:3
94:7 109:8
Kathy [3) 176:4
33:16 35:20
33:19 43:6 48:14 35:21 48:1 53:14
'
181:2
intended [21 41:14
110:13
180:17
114:1 164:17 190:9 kayak
issued kayak
56:20 57:2 62:5
68:9 68:20 69.9
56:12 56:24 58:7
58:9 58:17 61:7
45:7
[i1 69:12
[1) 86:1
keep 1161
69:1 I 69:18 69:22
70:9
163:15 199:6 199:12
intense 1 40:14
[)
issues 12s) 13;8
23:1
2:22
5:11 8:10 8:11
70:22 71:4
72:23
Lane/9N [,134.4
'
intent[1) 47:4
intentions [1) 107:6
23:5 23:8
47:14 52:12 55:13
59:10 82:8 102:11
21:21 81:16 89:1
90:9 109:12 141:21
73:4 73:10
73:11 73:19 74.17
75:21 76:8 76:11
lanes [2]21:21 43:9
large [13) 25:2
interceptor[1) 184:21
104:16 107:23 108:11
142:1 169:20 170:12
198
76:19 76:20 77;21
32:5 71:19 71:20
71:21
interchanges []]
34:20
108:21 109:21 131:5
152:23 159:26 167:16
:1 198:13 200:12
keeps [,] 182:[0
78:23 79:1 82:16
82:17 85:9 85:10
85:8 86:2
147:22 149:15 152:16
'
interest [s) 12:4
168:11 173:7 177:2
190:1 208:3 212:12
Kendrick [11 131:15
kept
86:20 86:21 88:7
88:8 88:10 88:11
166:1 169:21 196:12
largely [,) 201:4
36:11 123:24 152:1
item [1) 106:3
[18921
) :
88:16 89:10 89:14
larger[3)
156:1 184:7 184:8
207:2
items[2) 124:1
Kevin [3) 82:13
91:7 91:10
91:21 92:3 92:6
93:13
136:20 150:13 26:24
interested [61 5:3
198:24
kickback [1) 183:14
93:17 93:17
93:18 93:21 98:12
largest[11 178:2
'
142:1 184:30 195:12
itself[2)76:20 170:11
kid[21 92:11 142:8
102:23 105:21 106:21
I''[1) 1:11
202:6 202:9
IVY[11 68:20
[$)
107:18 109:5 ] I ]:I S
laser [1) 8:8
interesting [11 54:2
J [3] 101:24 128:4
9 :9 138:18 142:5
116:20 117:24
129 g's) 302
'
interior[21 20:6
151:22
142:6 172:1 180:2
117:32
118:5 118:22 119:2
31:21
46:16
20:8
intermodal [11 117:8
Jack [5) 1:18 12:15
200:8 200:10 200:13
kill [1) 54:18
kind [12132:3
119:4 120:2 120:15
121:6 122:6 122:14
56:14 92:18
108:5 119:16 146:15
165:2
internal 12] 57:23
Jackson [11 207:7
57.11
85:21 94:22 95:2
122:22 123:3 124:24
206:3 207:10
212:10
'
57:24
jail[i) 165:2
97:9 115:20 127:1
135:9 137:1 137:3
Lastly [,1 162:22
International [1)
James [3) 77:24
127:10 153:18 183:13
138:8 138:23 139:19
late 171:23
208:11
82:13 88:5
186:15
139:21 141:19 143.24
[3) 200:12
210:15
interpretation [1)
Jane [i) 193:1
Kirk (1) 1:24
1
147:4 147:8 147:18
147:22 148:4 148:7
lateral
27:8
Jay[]) 68:20
kitchen[,) 175:11
149:8 150:4 150:14
[11 190:23
latest[])
'
interpretations [i)
196:20
Jeff 141 11:16 184:2
knew [61 135:4
150:1
152:2 152:6 153:4
99:7
Lauderdale 171:19
intersection [7) 27.17
191:11 192:22
Jersey p) 203:21
150:2 170:19
209:1 209:8
153:23 153:24 156:16
159:13 161:I . 162:19
[i)
laughable [1) 23:9
28:1 33:13 33:14
Jet [z] 135:13
knock [1] 40:23
162:20 169:11 169:13
launched [1) 40:6
'
34:4 35:17 61:5
135:15
JlmI21
]moll [1) 22:19
169.16 169:17 170:1
laundry [,) 175:17
intersections[2]
60:14 61:20
38:20 39:16
Joanne [,1 )
knowledge[]) 93:10
1803 08 18:019
:18:8
law[2] 133:23 188:22
interstate [41 28:9
5:6
Job 171 .11:2 92:9
jmoWE [31 24:20
75:1
182:21 183:15 183:16
lawn [3121:19 46:8
116:1
32:9 36:1 62:24
95:4 96:6 102:8
211:6
125:2
k
knows [3) 79:7
185:2 185:3 185:4
185:7 185:20 186:11
lay [,) 83:9
intimidating [11
95:2
211:11
jobs [211100:13
170:22 191:21
186:12 186:13 187:9
layer [11146:4
141:12
Intimin [,] 38:12 142:8 142:8 142:9
Knoxber[,1 129:19 188:14 188:20 190:22
191:14 192:6 192:11
layman [1) 157:7
introduce[]) 11:13
142:10 143:9 172:13
173:23 174:5 174:9
LaBombard[43) 192:14 192:20 193:21
1:10 13:1 14:22 205:10 205:13
layout[2]g;4
50:15
intrusive[2) 53:12
174:10 174:11 177.13
205:16
14:23 15:5 23:2 205:19 205:22 207:24
layperson[i) 83:3
53:17
179:18 197.12 197:20
23:13 56:8 65:6 lakes [2) 89:15
lead [a) 3:8
invest [1] 104:17
197:21 198:3 198:10
198:10
66:18 66:21 77:22 91:22
80:18 82:12 91:7 lampooned [1] 23:10
90:15
134:14 145:4
'
invested [1) )04;13
jockeys
investment
[2) 100:23
jeadin 1
101:18 107:14 123:22 land [3a) 9:22 10:2 g [) 139:22
[3) 37:1
101:2
124:19 128:3 134:22 10:23
11:5 11:7
leads 12160:7 114:1
11:7 22.12 46:23 leakin 1
Peggy Alex Y - Court Renorter M I ftl �t�_n�� g [ I 68:1
e
3-67
I=
I
H
L
U
I
Public Hearing
learn [$1 17217220 210:20
211:4 211:8
211:9
211:10 211:12 211:21
learned [i1
24:15
learning [11
172:16
least [51 34:6
48:10
64:11 114:15
157:6
leave [914:18
4:19
25:6 25:15
28:19
52:15 90:17
145:22
173:3
leaves [11
204:24
leaving [21
28:21
204:13
Lebowitz [2]
1:18
12:15
left [121 27:6
27:11
60:24 61:13
61:15
140:2 148:8
183:24
189:20 189:23
200:7
206:5
left-hand [3)
58:9
131:14 148:13
legal [512:19
12.14
33:24 175:17
194:17
legitimate (1)
33:24
Iegs [21 34:3
168:16
204.8 204:]0 206.10
lifestyle [1)204:19
ligbt [141
30:1
33:16 33:17
33:17
33:20 36:6
36:8
60:17 61.8
61:16
61:22 103:6
103:19
148:13
lighting [11
103:1
lightly [11
187:20
lights [21
35:5
60.15
liked [2)171:3
191:17
likelihood [11
36:4
likely [sl
32:11
37:12 144:19
160:10
160:11 160:17
167:23
187:10
likes 111 64:17
limit [4124:17
146:12
188.10 190:4
limitation p1
188:2
limited 151
42:15
58:13 76:22
168:8
187:24
limiting (2)
69:17
118:9
CondenseIt'
lives (2) 54:19
125:21
living [7)
15:21
5824 59:2
59:16
93:12 180:19
206:19
LLC[11 1:19
loading (5)
71:1
73:1 73:6
76:4
76:8
JOooy [l1
8:5
local [33]
2:21
24:5 28:12
28:14
28:16 28:23
29:2
29:5 29:7
29:9
29:11 29:15
30:16
30:20 31:16
31.18
32:3 52:9
62:6
73:21 81:13
82:2
111:19 128:14
132:3
132:23 133:4
172:14
174:13 174:14
178:9
204:15 205:8
localities [11
185:13
locally [41
81:11
92:8 173:5
178:7
locals [21
34:1
35:2
locate [2) 7:18
Lelnbach [11
Leme ry [31
12:2
1:18
limits 131
38:13
7.18
located [s1
7:18
1:19 12:15
68:24 77:15
Linda [ 6
56:4 70:16
74:20
less [51 18:10 30:5
56:11 138:5
138:5
194:73 160:19
182:20
58:19 129:10 160:11 138:7 149:9
lessen
location [71
1 I : ] 0
[1)
lessened [1]
34:16
32:21
line pol 17:8
32:18 61:11
17:12
70:13 76:16
87:24
lesson [11
24:15
8520 107:3
73:14
117:23
159:21 168:5
locations
206:8
30:7
LetS p1 151:8
118:2 118:20 119:10
[6)
30:11 42:19
43:5
letter[2121:5
65:16
123:211 126:24 126:8
70:6 119:9
letting [11
88:3
140:13 150:11
157.13
logarithmic [11
15:17
level [171
18:4
157:20 169.23
170:1
longer[3]
104:10
18:13 20:4
20:16
18422 185:1
185:11
152:19 170:20
28:2 41:9
46:12
187:6 187:9
187:11
look [2919:3
14:8
51:3 52:7
53:5
18721
25:10 27:10
82:23
72:21 74:3
74:16
linear[11
38.14
83:10 85:6
101:8
74:18 154:18 170:15
lineate [11
15:17
106:9 114:21
116:14
193:23
lines [s1 86:7
90:1
levels [21]
7:11
90:4 116:18
122:13
119:3116:24 122:19
127:9
127:7
7:12 20:3
21:1 21:3
20:7
21:9
123:9 150:12
187:23
141:17
147:16 147:17
144:22
150:17
:15 :22
:9
linked [21
188:18
160:7 186:18
190:21
54:21 67:
67:21
189:15
199:24 202:24
204:9
68:5 68:14
76:1 I
list [4) 87:10
174:19
looking [13]
7:20
76:13 84:12
120:22
174:20 175:21
27:24 38:16
85:15
121:20 164:7
listen [31
44:22
11422 141:11
141:14
Levin [21
143:21
6220 63:22
150:17 154:6
174:8
143:22
listened [11
146.17
201:6 202:22
211:6
Lewi [2182:14
97:1
listening [11
138:12
looks [1]
197:14
libraries [l]
203:23
liter [1] 75:14
loon [2) 87A
87:4
library [21
83.4
live [261 65:2
65:3
loose [1] 202:23
105:15
88:1 88:6
107.16
Lorraine [2]
123:22
lie 111 93:23
113:15 117:17
119:7
123:23
lies [21 30:8
105:21
125:21 135:8
143:23
Lorrie [11
147:7
life [171 6:18
54:17
184:5163:15 1911:14
193:43
lose 143:12
173:22
86:15 107:23
109:18
193:8 199:4 200.15
losing [31
g
40:3
109:20 109:22
111:7
205:10 205:24 206:17
137.17 173:24
137:7 152:3
167:12
206:18 207:7 207.18
lots 1171 5:19 8:21
171:24 203:19
204:6
lived 121138:8 191:15
26:13 49:20 55:11
67:24 74:13 75:3
Peggy Alexy -
Court Reaorter (S1 R)6 6-oAAn
3-68
83.17 88:1-3
g
96.14 130:9
139:16
142:18 166:14
199:23
loud [12]16:14
39.15
51:10 55:12
6320
63:21 94:6
120:6
121:1 133:6
135:1
136:12
Louder pl
2:2
loudness p1
16:5
love [3) 91:21
141:2
203:18
Lower [1]
106:4
lower [11
145:21
lowest [11
31:12
lumber [11
175:16
lure[') 139:2
Macl3wan 121
1:9
65:10
machine [21
41:12
128:16
-- -I IIOS [21 38:1
55:6
MacKrell [11 1:19
Magazine [41 40:8
40.11 40:21 132:9
Magic [41 38:7
38:19 39:12 39.16
magical [11 60.17
magnified p1 135:2
magnitude [11 41:13
mail pi 53:15
Mailing [11 78:24
main [4187:13 103-1
156:11 181:24
Maintain [11 16513
maintenance p
108:23 174:22 175:16
majorpll 7:6
39:24 49:14 64:6
105:2 105:16 105:18
118:2 152:20 190:6
200:5
Majority[1] 10:7
makers [11 60:10
makes [3) 15:18
47:10 121:16
Malpin [31 200:9
212:8 212:15
management [151
10:22 38.22 45:13
51:11 60:5 67:21
73*24 83:17 115:3
115:23 116:13 117:3
117:6 147:21 177:20
manager[31 5:6
205:5 210:11
Manchester[11 12:9
manifest 1] 27:7
manner [11 90:24
Manning (1) 11:20
Mannis [21 68:19
88:6
[1) 1:13
learn - measure
facturer [11
40:5
map (3) 43:6
70:13
118:17
maps [1) 85:7
March[21
210:15
212:18
Marie [31
184:2
191:11 191:14
mark 1711:13
2:6
12:11 23.19
38:18
133:19 196:7
I[1)
100:1
marketed [11
97:2
marketer [3]
97:1
98:23 100:8
marketing 121
97.12
175:9
marks [21
19:17
20:12
Martha's [5]
8:8
8:11 22:12
50:3
89:18
Mary 131.:-
1103
128:4 134:22
massive [21
35:7
88:13
masrer 121
5
130:11.
165:11
0 material [1]
184:14
materials [31
175:1
175:7 775:9
math [1] 57:19
matter 151
93:24
126:24 155:10 178:18
214.12
Matthew [11
11:23
mature [21
112:10
165:20
Max 121 128:4
138:4
may [2oi 2:20
15:1
15:24 20:20
24:21
25:3 34:13
36:6
36:16 68:9
92:11
95:6 118:6
120:6
121:6 123:15
126:6
142:21 185:14
194:8
Mayer p]
196:5
mayor [11
159:3
McGowan [3]
91:9•
107:14 107:16
McNeil [2)
128:4
134:22
McNulty [6)
56:8
56:9 56:11
60:1
79:21 79:21
mean [111
49:9
78:17 79:10
84:1
84:2 88.22
94:10
104:2 154:13
195:4
197:10
means [3l 33.24
113:7 194:15
meant [21 93:5
93:6
measure [31 64:4
Public Hearing
123:7 170:17 COndenseIt�l
measured t3J ] s:11 mid [I] 25:21 mitigated [2] 17:6 measured - nerv,
mid -or -far -ground [il 84:19 motorcycle [Il 182:7 natural
15:15 117:20 42:18 motors 1 [s
measurements 1 mitigating [2) 7:9 [ J 38:15 84:5 89:21 90:6
21:6 [ ] middle [Il 61:12 123:7 mountain 1101 28.24 90:18 112:15 130:2
Midnight pl 44:17 mitigation [�l ] 2:3 38:7 38:19 39:12 132:11 132:15
measures[6l 19:11 39.16 67.15 81:1 nature[2] 102:7
47:12 51:7 73:2 MIght [12J 624 13:4 19:10 41:6 91:23 131:1 81:1 71 ur
164:16 180:13 30:17 49:3 93:1 43:17 47:11 180:12
94:4 138:9 149:12 mix [Il 75:12 mountains [1] 127:9 nature`s [IJ 11.1:2;
measuring [iJ 21:3 155:21 173:3 174:4 mouth [il 107:10 near Io 26:8 77:16
mecca I mob [il 56:23 [ ]
[ ] 132:12 193:18 195:9 move [aJ 15:2 88:1 129:14 149:14
mechanical [1] 175:13 migration I mobile [ll 210:22 52:14 66:20 168:4 194:7 194:20 265:22
media 1 [ ] 87.5 mobility [1) 29:2 194:16 205:19 205:22
[ ] 2:21 Mike [zJ 153:20 169:18 205:24 206:2
medical [I] 175:19 mile [al 34:10 38:18 40:17l [a] 17:12 ] 1 14 moved Iz nearby pJ 166:3
meet 121 91:18 211:5 63:1 182:6 [ ) 107:20 necessary [6] 34:14
Miles modeled [zJ 68;7 109:17 129:20 171:19 37:10 47:5 88:19
meeting [aJ 2:9 [sJ 38:10 121:3 200:13 200:21 201:15 126:7 151:6
11:2 11:12 107:9 392 42:3 103:4 modeling 201:16 203:21 206:13 need [zaJ 7:3
169:4 183:8 198:16 103:10 g[4] 68:8 2]0:13 212:18
205:21 mill [IJ 63:5 68:12 117:9 121:5 37:17 48:9 48:17
meetings [zl ] ] 9:20 millennium [zl 40;7 modern [Il 42:2 movie [3) 6:23 48:19 52:2
6:24 7:1 55:15 58:3
180:23 40:22 modifications[IJ g [2] 12976:12
movin 82:7 86:7 106:21
meets [2] 72:22 Miller [sl 1:13 128:15 :6
modify 1 186:6 110:24 111:4 115:19
206:22 183:23 184:2 191:11 Y [ ] 200:3 Mrs [zJ ] 4:22 79:21 140:17 142:12 153:18
member[aJ 1:10 191:14 Mohican pl 78:22 155:1 158:12 158:20 1:10 1:1 ] 1:11 milli moment 1 MS [43] 1:10 13:1 167:8 177:4 158:10
$rams [11 75:14 move z[ ] 39:8 14:23 15:5 23:2 204:9
1:12 201:5 202:1 million [26] 6:5 Y [ IJ 79:11 23:13 56:8 65:6 202:23 208:8
207:11 14:7 26:5 37:2 95:20 95:20 96:14 66:18 66:21 77:42 needed [aJ 20:22
members [I6J 1:21 57:15 72:11 94:16 97:20 97:21 98:5 80:18 82:12 91:7 52:3 115:2 166:15
5:3 5:3 55:21 98:20 99:19 104:14 98:7 100:2 107:1 101:18 107:14 123:22 needs [sl 12:3
78:1 124:20 134:23 104:18 105:9 105:14 107:10 123:15 137:16 124:19 128:3 133:21 48:6 48:7 112:2
135:3 140:21 140:23 106:10 106:23 106:24 137:17 137:21 137:24 134:22 138:4 143:20 114:6 148:18 167:6
168:2 172:19 184:3 174:7 174:16 174.17 152:17 152:18 181:10 149:6 151:18 151:21 206:11
202:3 203:10 211:10 177:24 178:1 178:6 204:9 211:12 163:13 169:5 169:9 negative [lol 24:12
Memorial [Il 100:10 178:12 178:18 179:1 Monica [il ] 91:7 171:10 176:1 180:16 25:7
179:9 35:1 45:21
memory[IJ 113:11 monies [31 182:18 183:22 189:21 191:1 59:23 164:12 166:4
mention [6] 44:13 mullions [31 92:22 182:20 182:22 191:10 192:22 196:5 168:9 200:3 202:23
86:16 99:14 142:10 96:11 96:13 monitor a 200:6 203:12 207:5 negatively
Milne [ ] 109:2 210:9 212:8 [I] 131:2
lent edp6 [sJ 56:10 118:12 118:23 195:22 negativism[Il 81:3
mentioned [I6J 41:6 118: 66:4 90:19 monitoring psl 53:11 multiple [IJ 326
51:11 74:17 84:10 118:14 multiply['] negligible 14 29:2
53:I6 53:20 54:22 P Y [ll 177:18 29:24 42:14 432
84:22 85:3 109:7 nand[3165:15 89:2 68:16 69:3 69:6 municipal1171 33:23 neighbor[51 22:16
118:13 148:3 163:18 157:6 70:4 108:22 118:1 57:1 105:5 106:17
92,12 164:23 165:8 177:22 minded[j] 123:20 118:5 118:6 119:22 106:19 160:8 187:11 1416 96:11 98:16
178:5 179:20 212:14 Mini [2) 141:19 205:14 120:12 120:14 187:14 187:20 187:22
mentions [1)
188-4 188:9 neighborhood [Isi minimal [3] 106:12 MODSter[ij 125:14 189:11 190:16 88349:13 50:23 56:18mentoring [IJ 172:23 115:7 144:12 month [zl 2:17 191:6 1:156:19 70:10 94:1499:23
mentors[IJ 211:18 munimizing[IJ 67:6 music 1 130:11 140:4 140:8
merchants 1 81:13 minor[2] months [al 48:10 [ ] 55:12 163:24 165:2 167:2
[ ] [ ] 110:19 59:3 I74:3 125:23 must[I1J 35:2 163:24 165:16 167:10
merganser[2J 87;3 166:23 37:5 40:1 43:22 167:17 181:17 208:6
87:4 minute 6 133:12 134:20 ] 43ontraY[2] 62.6 :3 50:4 65:23 76:22 neighborhoods [I6J
[ ] 4:7 143:8
message [Il 173:6 132 23:19 65:12 M77:8 151:7 153:16 4 neighborhoods
Oho 47:9
Messinger[IJ 2:7 144:4 168:15 131:15 166:19 51:5 52:17 56:5
met [2] 126:16 126:18 minuteS 1101 12:24 morning [sJ 30:6 N [I] 215:3 62:20 64:12 65:22
metals 1 23:3 58:7 66:16 name [26] 2;3 76:21 84:14 121:22
[ l 90:20 66:22 94:17 119.23 183:9 30:15 135:4 5:4 9:24 2320 140:12 147:5 168:6
meter 183:9 208:3
[Sl 64:3 138:11 189:21 189:22 27:19 88:5 96:24 170:17 170:19 170:20 miserable [IJ 54:19 most [21) 7:21 101:23 107:15 111:13 nei hborin
170:22 g
23:23 27:14 36:14 113:14 123:23 138:7 111:19 g 12140:4
mislead [IJ 60:9 metes [Il 185:138:22 42:5 78:2 140:22 140:23 143:22 neighbors [13] 19:15
8 miss [1] 39:17 78:17 85:7 86:17 147:6 169:10 171:15 20:15 22:11 44:7
method [I] 16:20 misstatements [I] 88:24 98:14 106:4 184:4 191:13 193:3 46:19 98:15 130:13
methods [IJ 108:24 67:3 123:24 124:1 141:15 200:13 203:14 207:6 Metiver[Il 1:12 mistake[11 206:4 142:13 152:5 179:10 212:14 153:2 164:20 166:3
Michael [zJ 151:22 mistakes [27 146:3 196:18 213:11 177:4 208:4 208:15
mostl I nameless I
190:13 146:10 Y[ ] 3423 names [ J 14:17 neighbors` [IJ 129:10
Michelle [IJ 81:20 mitigate [6l 13:15 motel [rl 50:2 55:18 [z] 14:17 Nemer[2] 128:3
Michigan [I] 107:21 14:2 59:5 80:9 50:3 112:6 150:2 Nathan [IJ 132:9 nephews hews I
microphone [1) 15.14 115:5 200:3 78:23 112:6 150:21 P [ ] motels [IJ 97:17 National [1J 194:9 nervous [1] 91:191:15
5
Peggy A sexy - Court Reporter (518) 6 66-9634
3-69
Public
ucsling [1]
8620
never[7]
39.6
48:22 95:6
139:16
156:15 189:1
206:16
new[431 1:7
1:15
1:20 5:19
6:1
6:7 6:21
35:15
37:13 40:2
40:7
41:5 41:11
49:5
49:6 55:10
89.22
99:13 99:15
115:1
129:13 133:24
134:7
141:11 141:11
141:12
141:22 141:22
141.22
160:6 170:23
17719
182:9 185:14
198:19
203:21 208:15
209:6
211:4 212:17
212:19
212:20 215:6
newly [2]
210:13
210:13
next [20] 8:2
15:5
37:3 41:1
65:6
82:13 91:7
101:18
105:17 105:19
128:3
151:20 169:5
169:8
178:1 178:8
183:22
191:10 200:10
205:20
nice [41 15:13
65:1
65:3 135:1
nieces 111
91:15
night 1s) 20:5
20:9
21:15 94:11
136:15
146:15 169:1
171:12
nightmare [2] 85:19
85:21
nighttime [11
44:5
nine[i] 135:4
nobody [6]
109:6
150:1
150:1
181:15
183:1
193:24
noise
[135)
10:20
12:10
13:11
13:12
17:18
17:19
18:4
18:13
18:23
19.5
19:6
19:13
19:20
20:3
20:4
20:7
20:16
20:18
20:19
21:1
21:3
21:12
21:15
41:3
41:4
41:9
41:16
43:16
44:22
45:15
45:17
46:17
48:21
49:2 -
49:9
49:14
49:21
50:22
51:4
51:7
51:13
51:17
51:19
52:18
53:4
53:9
53:12
53:14
54:3
54:4
54:7
54:10
54:12
54:16
54:17
56:1
58:23
59:11
63:11
63:24
68:5
68:10
68:14
68:18
68:21
69:13
69:17
69:19
69:22
69:24
84:9
84:12
84:14
84:22
93:7
93:10
93:22
95:15
103:17
110:4
111:1
112:24
117:17
117:17
118:3
118:8
118:9
118:15
uvrcneast[,)
143-11
northern "1
71:20
Northway [2s) 21:22
22:9 22.16
49:22
52:16 57.10
57:11
'M80: 4 88:22
102:21
2 129-23
130:3
130:13 136:17
146.19
165.15 165*19
165:22
166:2 166.12
193:6
193:7 193:19
199:8
northwest [ll
70:19
notable (2)
67:1
67:2
notably[,)
69.10
Notary 1,)
215:6
noted [3]
107:8
120:3 215:8
nothing [11]
35:10
40:16 97:10
97:11
113:3 119:5
145:1
150:17 150:19
162:20
182:24
notice[2]
2_18
24:19
noticeable [5)
16:10
16:17 18:1
19:8
89:13
notices I21 2:17
2:19
111 183:7
119:5 119:8 119.11
119:22 120:1 120:3
120:22 121:7 121:10
121:10 128.6 128:9
128:17 128:18 128:23
129:3 129:18 129:21
129:23 130:13 132:23
136:2 136:7 136:12
139:4 139:23 140:11
147:10 150:24 163:20
164:1 164:6 164:10
164:11 164:19 164:23
165:22 167:17 170:15
176:23 180:14 192:1
193:7 193:13 193.23
205:23 206:1
noises [3] 53:17
62:21 103:14
noisiest[,] 93A
noisy [1) 49:7
non-residential 11)
62:13
none [1) 20-10
nor[21 121:9 166:I0
normal [3) 15:21
74:22 89:6
normally [1] 208:4
north 116] 5:21
9:16 26:14 26.18
27:2 43:8 61:13
62:11 80:3 98:2
118:22 146:5 ] 602
187:8 189:3 203:17
northbound [s] 26:22
33:10 35:16 60:20
61:1 61:3 61:7
61:9 1J umoers [6]
30:23 34:16
83:23 198:5
numerous [1)
Nursing [1]
nutrient [5)
CondenseIti
November[,] 18:I
now [70] 4.2
9:13
9:21
%3
10:
18:16
24:13
31:
36:7
42.23
59:1
61.10
65:2
65:
66:17
69:10
69:2
70:8
71:17
72:1
74:20
75.10
80.5
85:20
95:22
96:1
98:7
99:9
99:1
100:16
104:16
105:
105:9
108:1
111:
120:6
130:5
135:
135*21
135:24
136:
137:2
137:10
137:
138:16
139:14
139:1
139:19
140:16
144:1
149:18
150:4
156:
156:23
157:13
159:1
165:18
174:6
174:1
174:15
180:20
182:8
186:6
186:19
186:2
187:24
189:18
193:8
193:12
197:16
Nowhere [2)
45:15
68:12
nuclear[,)
102:3
number[23]
4:12
8: 3
16:2
20:24
43:11
54:14
56:11
86:14
99:18
108:10
109:2
109:6
109:17
109:24
110:6
110:24
111:8
114:22
120:11
128:7
138:15
165:23
166:14
18:9
72:9
67:2
81:21
70:24
71:21 76:4 76:7
151:1
nutrients [1) 85:1
O [,1 215:3
o'clock [4] 135:4
168:22 169:2 210:7
O' Connor [31 151:22
153:21 169:18
O.'Connor's [1] 190:14
Oak [i) 62:8
Oakville [1] 74:8
Obliterating [1] 61:15
Observations [2)
53:21 102:2
Observe [1] 123:4
obvious [41 26:17
64:13 118:24 165:24
obviously [91 7:8
14:1 19:11 114:11
129:9 142:23 142:23
181:5 200:17
occasional 121 190:19
205:15
occasionally [3]
20:14 103:8 190:15
Peggy A1exy - Court Reporter (518) 656-9634
3-70
"wa5lvIls [1] 44:17
occur 191 10.6
6 25.17 50:1 74:3
21 75:5 87.24 90:24
7 112:8 185:15
3 Occurring g [,] 86:13
7 October[s] 21:2
21:13 21:14 21:16
100:16
9 off 1161 .8:14 40:13
7 40:23 51:12 56.24
4 59:17 80:4 100:23
12 135:12 139:2 143:4
17 149:16 159:18 170:5
15 206:3 212:6
4 off -site [,) 49:8
4 offensive 1
Y0 [ ] 140:3
5 offer [s] 60:16 120:4
p 145:17 211:24 212:3
offered 12] 47:12
p 119:20
Offering (2) 159:12
180:1
offers p] 60:8
Office (4) 34:6
175:20 194:19 198:6
Official [i) 64:15
officially[,] 167:20
Officials 111 34:9
Often [2154:7 160:23
oil [1) 68:2
Oils (2) 90:20 90:21
old 141 63:16 83:5
172:17 211:4
oldsters [11 129:5
Olympics D] 97:8
omission [1) 70:8
omissions [4) 24:1
67:2 68:4 86:14
omit [,1 68:18
omitted [3) 24:16
71:7 168:12
on -site [1) 32:17
once [7) 25:12 66:21
93:21 94:18 94:19
94:22 94:23
one [s9) 1:14 9.12
13:1 13:12 16:22
19:22 19:23 19:23
23:18 25:13 • 25:19 0
34:2 36:22 40:8 0
41:23 43:19 44.18
46:2 46:6 47*24
51:23 57:5 58:2
64:19 68:24 69:5 0
70:12 84:17 85:10 0
86:4 86:18 86:21
88:11 92:20 93:4 p
98:10 100:7 106:10 O
106:23 106:23 108:10 O
109:2 110:8 110:11
110:18 110:19 112:16 or,
113:8 113:11 114:22 3
118:24 120:11 125:19 1
128:7 133:22 134:9 2
137:7 141:8 142:23 or
148:3 149:12 152:13 1
Or
nesting - ordinal
152:14 157:16 161:1
162:16 170:21 178:2
178:11 178:13 178.1;
T
79:8 183:2 189:390:20 191:3 192T,
193:24 194:5 194:7
195:12 197:14 197:1;
198:15 198:24 206:3
209:6 212:11 213:11
one -one [1] ; 70:12
ones [6) 87:1 87:7
87:7 89:19 89:22
163:17
ongoing [1] 13:16
onto [51 27:2 58:6 .
58:8 61:13 205:19
Open [6) 4:8 I8:8
21:17 143:3 143:4
155:20
opened [2] 100:15
207:16
Operate [2) 44:16
158:17
operating [1] 18:9
operation ['71 24:19
44:14 45:1 45:22
89:2 157:5 194:15
3perationally [1]
- _.'u1lonS[3) 51:3
210:11. 212:15
opinion 131 48:11
60.2 113:22
Opinions 121 101:23
102:2
Opportunities [1)
143:12
Opportunity [27)
2:13 36:20 47:22
48:3 55:16 78:10
91:17 101:22 124:22
127:23 128:6 155:23
163:16 171:14 172.18
201:21 201:23 203:1
210:16 210:20 210:23
210:24 211:4 * 211:16
211:21 212:24 213:9
oppose [2) 155:7
207:19
opposed 14l 108:2
108:8 154:6 163:10
pposing [11 27:11
ptimmizing [1] 35:5
ption [4] 61:15
122:11 123:1 148:6
ptional 111 158:1
ptions 121 123:20 .
210:1
[11 3:2
range [1] 116:2
rchard [1] 131:24
der[9118:23 36:23
7:4 65:11 65:12
33:10 166:15 204:7
09:1
dinance [5] 111:2
�8:23 129:2 170:16
ice
5
1
TL-£ •
tQI c) jouodag lino - XxarV Mad
tr:£
19l posodoid
E:Soz
Z:9
(oz7;aEld
£Z:6S1
E'9L
61:09t
wS aasaid
Z[:091
TZ:LLi TZ:LLI
(�l suoi}Tsod
OZ:LOZ Ina
TZ'KI
9PHI
£:9ZI 8:5z1
ZZ:68 91:68
81:Z6
9:5E
8:ZL 21
Islaanpoid
6:5L
OV96T
tzlpa;uosaid
6:09[
ItlaoT;Tsod
OZ:L9t
bt:ZS
TZ:8bT ZZ:Zfi
191sag Id
LI:88
ST:b9t
Cal asodoid
It]spsodozd
Z:681
LI:66T
CULT £I:L9I
51:91 LT:tr
61:Z£
£:9S ZI:bS
6I:T£ (viasod
L:trIZ
bZ:ETZ VVEiZ
EZ:6f[
81:b£I
£Z:££T Li:£5
9141 841 b:b
(siuopioluosasd
b:L51
Itlsuorliod
oum
tr1:L9t
tr:691 z:891
£t:tr£t 61:[ET
L:9Z[
(Z]jEsodard
Zt:9£
t:b
9t:Et £:b
(it] ssavoid
Z:Z9I
01:891
9:IEI
L:0£[ OZ:6Tt
Z:S91
S:6Lt
Z:191
ZZ:651 61:691
IZ:6£
(zl aop iod
61:611
01:601 i Z: TOI
6:I8I
E:091
tt:991 IZ:S9i
Z:09t L:8S1
81.0s
[z7spaaaord
tr:LS1
LI:88
Z:LS[ Rol
S:T8 9:9L
6T:5£I
91;9Et
(z]gwod
L:TOt
bZ:LS
IZ:08 I:8L
iZ:SS OZ:SS
TZ:LST
81:LSI Z:ZSt
T:bTz(t]S�uTpaaaoid
9:6S
8t:[s Oz:8tr
Ttag [t] saoT;Ejndod
145
Z. St:Lb
b:OZT
L'OZt iZ:611
S:trb
It]popaaaord
£:69
[z:T9 ZZ:IZ
9:ES ZZ:z£
Z:Lb
£I:[tr
bZ:Etr ZZ:£tr
tr[:bz 6I:8
5I:601
11:601 L:601
zt:ISI
111paaaord
IT:L
[ulluosoid
S:I£
(�aoguludod
01:5
Z:9 ON?EZ:9tr
tr:501
LI:9L trZ:9b
OZ:6 61:6
9:b
(t]ampaaOid
Gt6
[ilaaaasaid
LI:99
61:E
Et:E L:E
trT:6
CalSjjadozd
b[:£E[
It)jsmpaoord
8:6
itl11uuEdoid
b:SZ
(zlxuludod
t:t
UoguTuuRd
VFS91 9:IZI
5T:E81 61:I81
EI:6Z
Inuandoid.
51:01 ti3jood
-
81:501
bt:98
81:OL 51:OL
61:L91
9:651 9I:ZVI
81:01 z1:101
61:E6T
£:££I
IT]snuttejd
tr1:89
6:89 91:trb
ET:ztrt
Z[:LEI 6:LET
FLE
(£] ajudwd
p
91:£6t
6FZ9
9itul
I:SZ
161sat}iodoid
£:ICI
61:911 ZVOIT
L:tr£[
Ot:trit 6I:S9
EI:98t
.9:£6T
tr:Z9 ZZ:6S
6:bb
[zlpaaIIEjd
I1:96[
LI:Oit
trZ:£Ot ZZ:tr8
9:E
toondoid
T:6z
trZ:6161paod
£z:EoI
C961
Z[:891 VVE01
9148
ZZ:trE
9:65 tr[:£S
IZ:9z "I
L:Obt
[I�40[�a�S:ai
t[:£St
it]saoT;njjod
OZ:£OI
[zl;aaEjd
6148
[AXpodotd
E'tr1
(Lzlsmolgoid
£:6G
d
St:Esi
trt:E51 8I:8Z[
91:90Z
[ilaIIEjd
SUMtzliadotd
t:56[
81:L61 Et:Z8[
L:trd[
tilauo;sTgald
t:£[1
ZZ:ZOI
IZ:80[ It:80i
[tluoptillod
11:181 9:6L[
b:Z8i
81:691 6:991
I1:ZIT
IG59I
t,RV1 8FLEI
01:811 069
Z:991
b:S91 VVV91
(13KI;aeantropard
61:91[
MImorirjod
9:tr£t
Iro£1 Oz:OZI
IZ:6tr(d110ilE2Edoid
OI:tr9t
Z:SVI 8:L£1
iz:LS
Mgxg ilarpoid
b:ZEI
tilaoijod
9149
(djowd
9T:EZ[
OZ:oll St:o11
tr:[£
[ilp
cum isajad
LUM
61:8tr
IG88 £z:ZS
Bt:IZ(9t)uvjd
9:LZI
(11guTlomord
L146
ZZ:69 5:tr9
(11:42zd
£i:T (t7 j�ESd
E:86 ttl alod
tr:EE
trZ:LZt
Id a}oaiosd
8I:Z9
£:L[
91:09 £:6tr
(tzlm-a oid
Iq
8:Z9[
IdS EOL}Ovid
II
vva
ount trZ:S£
S:bL
zz:Ost
[tl pjaT;IITEId
6I:80zi aTEjd
Oz:SZ
(t]paZaojoid
LT:SE
[Af4ijtgvgosd
t:£zt
It] ssomod
Ez:9Z
tvls;IIrod
Oz:L8[
ILl;3IIraEId
£:60Z
L[:80z 6:9L
bZ:ZE1
[t1019Aud
z1:051
b:Otr
8:8
Z[:691
(tlsa}arod
[ilpa;urod
OT:tr61 E:LSI
L:ZE
(tilslooroid
61:58
1i]auT;sud
£[:ZZI
ZZ:T[i
[sl
Zi:ZbT
ZI:Tbi b:TOt
L:ES
[t1;taTlaafoid
L:L8[
trZ:SE
lamod
8:90Z
b:L81 ZI:S81
Tz:9t
193 saaE d
I
trZ:8L1 L:SLT
E•LSI
(zlSluoud
61W
(iltlam0d
6:981
ZZ:tr8[ COT
Z:LSI
ST:OZ[ Z1:811
8:zS
Idpopof id
61:SLI
MZUTluud
oz:sz
It)sinod
[tlpalnod
81:851
S:ZZt
61:191 VVOEI
9:91I I:811
zt$I1
LI:9L 61:6E
[c]paaEjd
01:661 S:01
6:bEI
WliedToaud
IZ:86
01:011
9:011 trZ:601
61Z
t:L61
W961 IZ:961
S:trZ
(tlaatud
UMI
tilspunod
LI:601
9:60t OI:80l
8:51Z
1:961
51461 VW
iEF
S1:1£1 bZ:tr01
I:SOT
zRof 61:06
8:bOZ
Z:ELI Z:£L1
8:68I
6T:981 ZZ:58[
9:Llt
b1:98 £T:OL
trz:8£
(elpanod
ZI:59
[[:S9 bZ:09
9:Zbt
St:Ib1 91:811
OZ:tr81
1,:891
6T:tr81 L:S91
ST:Lol 8:L9I
SI:T1
is11CtEiuud
£1:96T
(il�jjBi;aa;ad
bZ:£S
9:£i
81:EE 61:IZ
[sdjurod
tr:tT[
I:99
bZ:L01 £:S9
91:55 E1:5E
COT
IZ:991 Oi:£9T
ZZ:LOI
QW1
6I:1
(viloaEld
£Z:09T
ST:9St 5I U
£[:£S
WXjumutud
11:9LI
6:891 bZ:191
£T:tr
6141
(zliumpod
b:S6T (ils;rd
OT:ZZt
f1:L8
8:ZZT IVIZI
ZI:9L Z:9L
S:LOI
IZ:9ET
(ZISIsnornaid
Z:L91
I1:b91
8:991 tr:991
ZZ:6ZI E:8tI
01:891
(il}a3jaod
E:£9[
(tl�anga;td
Zt:OG
8:b9 8:ZS
TZ:6LI
OZ:91I
01:901 tr1:501
EZ:8IIT] xmd
5:9tr[ IT3}id
£Z:OS
61:64 5:6b
b1:8Li
b:8LI ZZ:LL[
ZT:98
ZZ:ZL 0[:L9
Z:61IT]xYdd
G08
itl s a vj!
1 d
6i:ttr
6:9tr L:Sb
Z:9bi
b[:Sbt 8[:bbi
E:ES
EZ:Eb
8:6b 01:Str
E:tr1 6:II
or•86t it] sn d
j
6t:£8
EaRurdrd
1--btr
zz:£tr 8:L£
z:sot
(slsnornaYd
f1:OI
tczljET}aalod
V11
(t]Ezull
8UES
6I:Zt
Lt:6
Bt:Zt tr[:t[
L:L trt:S
£I:E6[
I')ZuttuoAaid
91:5zi
mogu}sod
bZ:86
VE61
NpOOMOUTd
8:9
In]ToafoYd
bait 61:601
0[:£Z
St:b6
iz3pa�Ejd
9:ZET
II:zlI [zlourd
zvsoi
10s}TgTgoid
61:5L
Idlaanatd
oZ:z
(zlins-}sod
O[:b6 [L]SEjd
L:ZET
[]smajlTd
WEZI
[ZIOAT;Tgrgoid
L:08
s:LSt
Idf4 aid
6:6£I
9:08 (zl}sod
S1:061
IZ:£OT
E1:9S1 OZ:S01
it]s;uEjd
mo
£:Z61 itljjrd
It]sooard
S:91,
£t:L6T
61:861
IT]MBi$oid
Et:86
[z]paolaid
E[:LS
wXjgrssod
£I:[L
z1:tL £1:os
8:091
[tlleouaaomd
81:18
9G9L[
IZ:B£ Z[:8£
01:LLI
£G251 6:8bt
6:09
1As2ui;uEjd
zZ:zb
[ti�aTm;ard
61:LL
[zls;Tjosd
5-S
trZ:9li
L1:trtT fZ:I8
61:OS
[tl$a. weld
} I
T:OOZ
[ilsam;aid
61:60Z
IT] t oid
}•�
8:[ST
t]}aaprsoid
[ilpansasaYd
9FEt,
ILIajgrssod
oz:zbl
(tl o us d
P } I
Z:9it Lt:6
EZ:Lt i
[tl sajgosd
91:991
91:L81 T F991
ST:Z61
Z:S
(£] arnpid
91:16
1:99 ZZ:LZ
tsllEuorssajoYd
EZ:8zt
IdOAnswd
6:991
tr:Sbi
L:651 £Z:SSI
t931i}TITgrssod
81:Z6T
EI:06[
ST:Z61 OZ:06[
9:58T TZ:69T
1:581
tzlpa3lard
6141LT (tl}anpoid
IFW
6FV61
8:tr8t 61:9b
b1:EIZ
ZZ:691
OZ:891 81:991
Sr•Lt
tr•581 1L73jard
ZZ:OZ[
IvlaojlEA.zasaid
S:EOZ
I1:LLI
9:EOZ vVzoz
E:bLT fit:SSt
L1:991
OZ:6EI
Zt:9St 6141,1
ZZ:9T1 LT:9TI
L:BTT
[t3,ijlEaisdgd
9:99
Ed paanpoid
ZZ:LOZ
[il sluosoid
5:18
ta] oApTsod
Ez:ft
51:EL 81:zE
01:6E
to juaisggd
pusuaOla - jsOTSAga 3�;Zasaapuo3 �IIue H orjgira
.
Pu bhe Hearing
8:3 12:3 12:8
Publisher [ll 40:21
COndenseIti"
'
24:5 30:24 34:11
35:15
105:20 105:23 1079 rate [2) 31:10 32:13 Decent �� regulatory
pumped [11 110:21
48:18 72:18 160:16 I11:11 141:16
72:21 87:16 88:14 Pumping (2) 160:15 143:16 147:23 165:10 rates [I) 31:13
54:14 202:4
89:17 104:15 108:9
184:22
169:3 171:16
rather [8) 16:1 recently (1) 170:13
112:20 115:1
1:14
:19184:5185:9 83:3 89:20 90:24 recePtin i
122:10 122:19
118872:108:13
2 1879
175:9 177:17 179.13 :196:2
113:10 113:12 169:20
121:22121:21
123:2 127:16 129:13 purchased [2l 108:4
[31 43:12
149:13
129:24 130:9 130:12
144:9
203:16 203:17 203-20
raw.19 23:22
�)169-6
49:13 84:13
4:
155:12' 156:11 147:1
155:12' 156:11 157:1
receptors i
203:22 204:6 213:15 Raymond 169:6 s [) 168.13'
purchases [2) 174:13 Queensbnry/L,ake 16:9 recess
157:6 161:6 161:19
174:21
187:5
[i) 69:10
[ll 168:18
164:13 166:21 169:22 Purchasing [i] 178:5
questioning [1) 110:16
RE [ll 1.4
recirculates [11 152:19
176:15 179:5 188:20 purplep113:9
questions ql
reach 131 33:11
42:3
recognized [11 33:23
194:8 194:12 199:10
purports 1
[) 72:I
fill4:1
7 4:2 11:18 11:19
71:22
recognizes 11) 177:1
proposes [1) 45:6
purpose [a) 7.7
reached [z) 20:13
12:22 32:19 65:24 167:2
1ecommend [a) 59:8
proposing [8) 5:16
5:23 8:1
8:17 37:8 78:14
63:16 151:14 180:10
133:15 133:17 163:4 reaching recommendations
8:10
Purposely['] 111:20
168:3
(1) 38:10
11l
11:9 58:21 78:5
189:10
Purposes 111 52:1
quick [51 7:13
reaction [1] 197:2
127:2
'
Pros [il 177:18
pursuit 12) 38:6
12:24 122:5 168:15 reactions [11 39:10 recommended [il
199:24 181:21
Prospect 2
P [ l 8I:1
77:18
put[411 11:1
quickly [6) 13:6
read [io)12:20 14:12
27:18 65:21 65.23 recommends [Il
130:24
11:9
13:18
33:11 58:19 90:14
78:15 117:18 133:1
165:11
protect 171 36:24
43:112:17
78 :22 195:2 207:12
133:8 164:3
reconditioned [il
64:23 109:11 129:17
81:9 90406
quiet [a) 62:19 ] 36:7
readable [i) 184:14
209:7
®
130:13 147:21 150:5
94:15 104: 123 06: 36:16 208
19 1:4
rean
di g[Iol 17:6
record [io) 2:23
protected [z) 53:6
107:10 111:4 l )1;5 quieter [Il ] 36:6
18:6 ] 8:11 18;15 14:20 31:8 40:20
115:21 115:24 116:1
quite (6116:10 16:17
40:24199:13
18:16 56:13 56:14 144:2 Z7:20 119:17
144:24
'
protection [1] 45.12
116:21 126:9 135:7
39:4 79:4 99:11
117:21 130:18 185:16
156:10 215:7
Protective [zl 82;17
137:23 140:19 147:11
171:7
readings [2) )8:2
recording [i) 4:14
88:9
149:19 156:4 160:1
quotation [zl 19:17
41:11
recreational [i124:9
protects [i) . 49:13
1811:9 181:22 182:34 20:12
ready77[5)144:7 65:8
recruited 196A4
prototype [1) 40:15
193:17 193:18 195:1
195:1
quotations [1] 46:3
77:24184:2
recruiting
g [ 1 172:8
protruding [1] 103:5
198:5 293:14
quote [zsl 36:23
real 32:13
recycled [11 146:4
rood 9 48;20
P [ 1
putt [1) 58:20
38:22 39:7 39:17
31:20 40:11
[6) 99:24 red [3) 9:18 36:6
112:T 159:7 195:10
55:5 55:17 91:20
92:5 100:18 180:24
puffin s
g [) 57:24
69:4 82:5 94:12
40:14
41:2 41:24 42:5
19913
137:15
reduce 2
'
201:15 202:4
113:23 141:22 150:2
42:11 42:20 45:4
realistically [I)164:9
[) 35:19
roved i 41:7
P [ 1
150:12 159.23
46:5 46:10 46:15
49:18 700:24 ]18:10
reality76.7
[al
27:16 33:3
reduced [il 142:17
Proven [ll 204;22
PVC [2183:18 83:19
120:22 121:23 165:12
129:7
129:
realize [3)
reducing [2) 7:9
'
proves [1] 153:7
quaint [il 104:7
166:23 167:22 189:24
8.20
36:13 149:3
127:
provide(161 2:14
Quaker[il 7:16
quoted[2) 53:20
realizingrefer[z143:i
[1] 25:2
[2 66:2
2:24 28:6 28:17
qualified [zl l 14;7
54:4
really [33)
reference [3) 42:21
33:8 37:9 46:9
196:23
quoting [il 117:20
13:6
41:4 55:9 59:4
71:11 117:22
'
46:11 46:24 47:17
49:23 52:14
quality [33] 10:19
R 12) 1:18 215:3
59:22 66:9 87;5
referred [zl 37:24
54:15
112:13 172:15 196:15
45:10 45:12 54:17
56:1 67:9 67:10
race [61 81:1 81.10
81:10 98:18 98:19
90:13 95:6 95:10
95:11 95:12 99:24
117:2
refrain
provided [7) 3:10
32:18
67:16 68:3 72:19
100:20
101:17 107:24 110:13
[,l 36:15
refrigeration
38:2 41:12
124:22 128:10 196:11
81:10 93:11 93:17
107:23 109:4
racket [1) 128:10
119:13 125:16 136:10.
150:9
[1)
175:11
provides [a] -51.12
109:18
109:20 109:23 111:7
radically [1) 122:23
150:16 152:17
153:17 165:5 165:5
regard [4] 32:9
112:1
112:14 112:20 112:21
radius [i1 179:8
165:5 191:22 193:14
68'4 102:11 199:15
providing
providing [Zl 45:9
5:9
132:23 139:11 167:11
Railroad [1) 1:19
193:20 196:23 197:18
regarding [131 21:5
67.8
174:5 177:13 185:24
rails [11 58:14
199:7 200:12
43:15 55:22 65:17
proximity [il 76:21
186:14 199:19 203:19
204:8 204:10
rain [ll 90:8
rear[i) 3:23
72:2 112:7 118:1
75:10 112:7 118:1)
psychological [rl
quantify [i) 43:11
rainfall [i) 89;6
rearranging [,l 166:13
121:10 197:15 198:20
39:10
public 1:3
quantities [i1 71:21
rainy [i)129:11
reason [51 94:8
113:19 116:11 180:7
regardless 121 33:20
111:8
'
[es]
1,21 2:10 2:13
quantity
q [l1 91:4
raise [41 74:18 82:24
107:22 172:1
203:21
regards [i) 106:14
2:) 7 2:23 3:15
3:15
quarrel [ii 125:11
12
raised[2l 190:2
reasonable [51 30:12
region 141 132:14
10:23 24:6
60:9
Qularter[ll 6:4raised
138:13 184:9 186:24
204.7
177:7 178:4 180:6
114:2 114:7
114:9 114:14 123:13
Queensbury [asl
1:1 1:6
rake [11 179:14
reasons [2) 123:11
Register[1] 194:10
132:24 133:22 134:2
1:7
2:5 24:14 28:10
ramp j3) 60:20 61:1
123:12
Registers [11 20:1
151:11 167:6 168:24
31:5 48:1 52:22
94:16
receive [4) 2:10
registry 111 157.23 j
198:23 209:17 215:6
64:21 78:24 79:8
ramps [ll 34:19
3:17 32:12 214:5
regular[il 90:22
'
public's [11 60:4
79:10 91:12 98:10
range [il 46:11 received [61 2:23
?egulations [1] 266.23
publicly[,, 95.24
99:15 105:13 105:16
ranger[i1 102.8
17:15 99.20 113:20
regulatory[31 19:20
Peggy Alexy - Court Reporter (518) 656-9634
114:19 134:4
20:10 194:18
3-72
-
-
Public
hc Hearing
reiterate [21
181:4[
entatives 1
153:10Fre
CondenseTt"``
1 67:17 67:23
reiterate - r01IteS
reject
9
122:1 ented[z) 98;1
127;19
respectively[il
38:4 3820 38:23
39:11 39:13 39:14
150:14 166:13 169:11
related [s]
20:19
179:1
39:24 40;5 40;7
180:18 181:24 182:4
184:5
20:20 20:21
167:24 176:8
128:8 enting [i)
res and z 40:8 41:3
156 7 [ ] 34:13 41:8
44:5 44:12
206:7 207;7
roads 3
[ s17:24
180:13responded[i)
176:10
51:8
132:5 6221 63:6 63:21
83 8:15 28:13
relation [i)
56:5 ents [i) 100:19
uction
response [i) 155:22
85.22 93.2 ] 27:8
128:11 128:19
28.14 28.16 2823
29'6 29.10 •29:16
relationship
51:15 54:10
[al51:1 [il
responses [sl 3:6
129:7
129:13 139:6 146:22 29'24 30:17 30:20
relative [i)
121:183:9 134:11 134:17
t[31 37.15 181:3
178:16 124:10 133:11
150:19 152:24 153:331:16 31:23 32;4
169:22 35;2 52:20 53:1
relatively [41
42:17 requested 121 5:10
responsibility12)
ides [2] 39:21
57:6 57:23
58:1
43:4 119:9
165:23 47:3
62:3
62;3 62:14
relatives [1)
149:24 require 17
q [) 36:1
responsible [41 93:20 rides [231 20:22
10:7 79:22123:1
released [�)
77:9 69:23 70:3 71:3
172:7 211:9 211:22
37:3 37:14 40:2
115.12
131:22 131:23 204:2
relies [1]
2323 71:10 71:15 71:23
rest 121 81:19 188:20 41:5 41:12 41:15
204:3
relying [i)
75:8 75:22 115:9 restaurant [81 5:Y2
151:11
47:5 49:7 55:1
55:10 92:22
roadway
Y [i] 200:5
remain[7)
117:7 122:20 145:18 5:22 6:8 22:3
5:23 146:1 146:3 146:9 67:20 112:6
103:5
111:5 121:2 133:3
roar[4) 39:12 135:5
'
37:5 127:13
145:16 160:7
163:2
163:2
141:22 146:13 146:14 135:13 135:15
146:8 151:7
remained [il
173:18 required [s) 2;) g
54:23 42:2
restaurants [i) ) 79:12
150:9 150:10 151:9
209:6
roaring [i) 62:24
Robert
remaining [il
154:19 157;9 restraint
81:19 167:22 [) 188:3
restrict [1)
Ridge [z) 59:16
184:5
[s) 1.11
143:20 151:21 151:22
remarks
17:24 requirement [z)161:2
1
129:2
restricting [1) 44:24
right [33]
151:24 176:4 18323
183:24
remember
r
17:24
2:3
:1
152:1 156:16
quir
177:3 requirements [il
restrictions [z) 44:10
3:17 4:1 4:23
rock [3) 62:21 165:1
152:13 156:16
] 77:5 194:18
153:17
8:9 8:12 14:21
165:2
'
i209:12
requres[sl 9:4
rests [1) 145:8
33:19 37:15 65:2
65:3 80:1
rocket [1) 102:3
remind [31
124:12 46:10 65:21 108:21
result ii
result[,,, 24:12
80:5
80:15 96:1 99A
Ro er
g [�1 15:5
172:10 213:23
117:6 186A 186:14 29:8 30:23 37:12
45:21
108:1 113:7 141.14
2 0
reminded pi
140:15 18822
67:20 73:10
129:24 167:15 173:15
145:5 145:8 145:11
Ro er s i
g [) 19422
'
removal pal
42:2 requiring [3) 47:16
173:24
149:14 149:16 151:8
roller[16] 21:7
22:11 46:22
49:16 129A6 154:5
resulted
151:12 154:4 1693
172A
38:9 42:2 59:19
67:18 71:18
72:1
72:1 ]l0:1
71:19 rescue [il 132:4
112:5 reside[21
eside203:15 [ 1
pI 120:24
results[3) 53:20
174:6 174:15
195:3 197:16
67:14 77:3 92:20
92:21 94:20 94:24
110:1
112:23
153:21
69:19 118:5
right-hand [p) )¢ga i
139:23 146:22 147:12
'
162:1 165:7
166:7
165:22 residence 121 180:21
retailers [i) 17913
rights [z) 155:9
147:16 164:12 170:9
roller-skating
180:21
retention
ention [i) 12:14
155:10
[i]
63:2
remove [31 58:22
136:18 182:9 residences [21 70:22
retired [i) ) 02:8
rigs [il 35:22
room[6)15:21
204:5
removed [6) 22:5
retirement i 181:11
[)
ring [71 520 7:24
80:
16:16
9815 132:16 138:14
22:14 22:23 84:20
resident [� 69:12
retrofitted i 115:6
[ 1
115: 22:6
80:10 115:12
142:14
165:20 189:1
91:11 122:7 124:23
152:3 153:23
1etrofitting (1) 51;7
Ringer
Rosenthal [I) 176:3
I71:16
removing [s) 21:18 residential[s]
return [21 30:10
146:9
pj 1:11
rinks [i) 63:2
roughly
g y [3) 10:9
'
22:1 50:8 172:10
182:11
19.15
47:9 62:13 64:11
76:21
reveal [) 13:9
rip [1) 4013
79:8 179:9
round
repair[2) 175:4
residents 191
revenues [3) 81:13
ripple [ 1 131:21
m 1:16
21 2:4 28:24175:13
30:21
41:20 44:19 62;6
81:16 197.13
risk 141 40:2 54:13
62:4 ] 31:15 J 77:10
repeat [i] 29:17 62:19 64:24 68:18
review [zz) 2:8
116:19 160:20
route [603 5:19
replace[2) 5:24 69:13 79:9 81:18
48:7 48:17 55:15
river [3) 73:8 73:9
9:15 16:24 27:17
130:21
] 05:13 ) 05:16 159:12
- 124:7 124:11 133:24
188:15
28:1 29:3 32:10
replaced[il 22:5
165:16 )67:12 )72;)¢
15I:6 154:19 ]85:24
road[6s)1:6 5:20
33;10 33:14 34:8
202:13 202:16 210:2
replacement [1186:5
186:4 186:14 186:22
189:2
7:16 8:14 )1:20
35:16 35:23 36:3
43-9
replacements [i)
resides [i) 47:8
189:7 189:17
190:6 196:17 196:24
22:6 28 24 28:24
29:1 29:1 29:12
46:18 49:12
53:2 56:23 57:22
10:5
resolution [61 44.11
197:1 197:6 209:17
33:13 33:16 33:19
58:10 58:22 59:20
replacing [1) 50:9
143:17 154:22 184:18
reviewed 131 9:1
33:21 34:10 57:2
60:22 60:24 61:3
report [$) 19:1
185:16 185:17
48:7 114:6
59:17 61:12 62;¢
61:7 61:9 62:3
resolve z
32:2 74:21 75:2 [ 1 59:9
159:5
reviewing [1) 166:18
62:5 62:7 62;7
62:9 75:23 78:23
79:24 88:15
130:19 131:9 132:5
133:9 resolved [i) 142:15
reviews [1) 189:6
62:8 68: 9 68 *i9
88:22
102:14 102:21 109:21
Reporter[t) 215:5 resource[i) 194:5
revising [1) 63:16
68:20 68:20 68:20
68:21
1102 130:16 130:23
13124 136:22
represents) 812 resources [3) 10:21
revisions [i) 3:10
ribbon 113:10
70:15 80:1
80:2 80:10 g1;1
136:23
137:1 148:3 149:14
4so 17[3)
207:8 98:18 141:1
207:8
111
ribbons 82:19
105-4
i07:16
149*20 157:22 160:1
165:8
respect [s) 112:14
[21
82.24
122:6102:16 122:14 165:12 165:17
representative [il
117:20 132:22 190:1
190:9
rid
122:14 122:23 123:3
182:12 185:6 185:8
185:20
'
97.44
[2) 63:17 63:19
131:24 132:1 136:24 187:21 188:13
y [4167:12 respectfully
P
ride [36) 24:13 24:23
137:3 137:4 143.23 199.24
206.4 i
2424 38:1 38:4
148:4 148:5 148:8 routes [i) 131:18
Peggy Alexy - Court Reporter (518) 656-9634
3-73
IJ
I
Public Hearing
170"3
rowboat [i) 170:J52
CondenseTt "" rowboat -Simultaneous
Royal [I] 121:Says
ruin
16 17:5
Y [ ] ] 7.18
66:18 715:10 160:22 serene [1) ] 32:11 S
190:5 its
[I) 137:209:2
Ike [41 17:24 18.28:22
19.12 20;2 serious 3 [I] 81:14
39:16 40:1) secondary [6) 52:20 54:13 166:2 25.16 shook [I] 165:1
19:7 21:10 :1 63:17 84:11 53:1 131:20 131:22 serious[ shore [6) 70:19
132:2 180 20 Y [1) 127:20
ruled p)190:7
ruling [I)
4.14 170:16 192:8
192:13 192:19
70:20 117:24 143:23
seconds [21 39:1 seriousness [1] 94:6 170:6 205a9
95:7
rulings I1)
scale [3) 87:15 87:20
40:10 Serve [314:11 157:3 shoreline I3l 70:5
172:5
95:5
87:23
secretary [2] 82:16 70:5 70:6
run 1101 13:20 14:5
63:5 115:24 116:18
207:13 serves II) 24:8 short [915:11 35:7
s146-23�) 1]3:5 section service 83:12
1 ] 7:13 122:1 ] 128:20 scenarios
158:19
[10 a 104:8
] 14:13 [ ] 10:23 104:8
17:18 20:2 37:9 28:2 ] 22:9 204:17 156:8 168:18 180.4
171:6
runners161 81:2
[11 33:6 71:17 72:2
scene z 72:4 services[12] 732:4 200:13
[ I 41.17 117:22 122:15 134:10 174:14 174:18 Shorthand
56:23
81:11 81:14 81:18
scenic
.175:12 [1) 215:5
secure [11 24:17 175:13 175:17 175:18 shovel [,]
82:2 82:4
12) 56:6
86:10
195.4
175:19 175:20 177:17
security[,] 174:23 show[12)
ni
runng 131 21:4
21:17 108:5
scented [1] 132:7
7,13
see [471 8:6 ] 7:9 178:6 204:1 8:3 10:1 18:3
set [3] 6:13
runoff 1
[ S] 67:24
17:11 27:19 35:10 7:4 18:7 22:8
Schachner 155:3 22:14
I3l 1:13 43:10 52:11 58:15 31:12 49:16
71:2 75:10 76:5
2:6 133:20
. 72:17
82:24 85:14 85:16 setting [1] 47:7 77:15 118:18
85:1 90:7 102:24 Scholarship [i] 81:21
109:3 i 13:21
86:8 103:5 103:6 Setup [1) 120:7 showed [I) 183:21
114:23 scholarships [,)
139:18 151:1 81:19
104:22 109:15 110:17 seven[ ,3] showing )
21:14131:4
110:23 117:24 122:15
183:18
104:35hown
27.5169:15
1
126:5 135:10 136:3 10417 105:9runs
[2) 38:10 1
100: ]0
9:23 105:16
43:5school[„]
:12 162:5:
139:14 :19 129:3 130:11rush[s)
39:17 141:3 ]41:1shows[6]
59:21
186:13 193:6
105:]38:
13:2310
2141:21 147:11 147:13 11 ]69:1 204:23 70:12 70:13 85:14158:19
105:23 171:19 178::23 149:22 several
193:16 193:19162:9
Ryan
[Is]
152:8
179:2 152:9 6:5 141:23 152:24
167:1 177:16 52:7 56:16 57:3 shrub
[1)12:11
Rye [I] 191:7
[1) 50:5
schools 12] 183:14 181:12 186:3 200:2 58:22 60:13 64:12 shrubs ,
203:23 200:17 201:7 76:8 83:13 114:3 [ ] 71:14
S&S[2] 40:4 40.16
Schulz[4) 183:24
202:5
202:8 202:11 210:21 120:10 134:20 196:10 side [23)9:15 16:24
Sabo I3) 151:23 163:13
184:1 I84:4 191:5
seeing[z] ]50:18 201:19 202:5 58:14 59.19 88:14
102:13
163:14
scientist [1) 102:3
202n Sewage [u] 32:]7 107:18 130.16
71:1 143:14
sacrifice[2] 152:12
scope P] 47:20
143:16 149:20
seeking [I] 25:9
72:2 72:5 160:1 165:7 165:12
167:9
sco in
P g [67 68:5
seem 6 26:22 83:15 75:15 103:19 105 3 165:17 166:17 170:8
[ )
sadly[,] 147:1
69:1 70:1 120:20
130:5 135:22 158:19 105:5 106:15 106:17 185:2 185:7 192:13
safe[z) 28:6 30:24
121.8 121:15
197:8 106:20 106:22 116:16 193:5 199:4 205:10
safeguard [Il 126:20
Scott (7112:9 169:5
segment li) 189:6 126:9 137:18 139:20 sided [,j 142:24
safer[i) 33:8
169:7 200:9 210A 6
segmentation [2) 156:12 158:9 169:17 sides [1)185:20
safety [31 167:11
212:8 212:14
188:23 190:9 169:21 185:4 185:5 Sight [7) 17:8 17:13
199:11 205:8
scream 6
[) 38:1
41:11
sewer 3a
selected [2) 42:1 [ 1 73:14 67:16 117:23 118:2
107:3
sales [9] I06:2 106:2
106:3
55:5 55:10
139:24 146:21
118:16 107:13 116:18 118:21 119:10
1515158:17 sighted
self-em to ed
P
106:6 107:11
178:12 178:19 178:20
Screaming[[) 41:17
62:22 103:10
,
Y [ ] [i] 87:1
181:12 159::6 159:10 :9 160:8 sign [3) 157:16 192:7
] 79:2
104:9
156:20 170:12 191:21
192:9
sell [i) 209:23 184:24 184:24 185:14
salesmen [,] 62:23
screams z
[) 59:18
semi -tractor [i) 186:9 187:11 187:21 signal [I) 61:23
Samoset[io] 8:9
128:8
15:23 187:22 188:4 188:9 signed[,) 14:18
9:16 22:3 22:I9
screen [2] 38:3
senior[3) 32:5 188:13 188:21 188:24 Significant[1o] 17:19
189:8 189:11
46:23 50:1 67:19
112:5 112:12 150:21
135:19
203:24 211:15 189:14
190:16 190:18 190:22 53:23 110:4
Sense[6) 77:2
Samples I,) 16:20
screening II) 103:14 ..
135:22
191:7 192:15 192:17 178:15 180.4 209:11
77:4 77:8 83:11
S1a7mP1ing [zl 16:20
Scrutinize [1) 148:21
151:3 153:11 sewering 141 32:20 Si nificantl
32:22 Iz)
scrutinized [1) 149:5
32:23 33:3 2:19 164:7
senses [1) 93:12
San [11 210.14
scrutiny
Y [I] 25:I b
sewers [a) ) 06:19 signs [z) 65:1 175:8
sensitive [s) 71:8 156:21 187:4
sand[31146:5 149:20
Se[I] 87:22
187:8
76:18 87:15 133:4 silence[,) 135:14
s ) 8:78
150.2
Santa
s
season [) 26:9
29:21 79:9 100:7
144:16 20.8 Similar[2] 63:8
68:7
8:7 68:8 121:3
sensitivity [1) 153:1 121:5 145:22
1
[ l 191:7
Saratoga [s) 1:20
100:12 104:9 143:4
177:9
sentence [z) 29:8 Sha 1n i 138:16
ping [ l simple [2)
) 84:6
92:1 98:16 170:14 seasonal
170:20
(7] 14:10
30:3 138:17
Shear [I) 27:14
September 3:15 SmP1y[a)
Satisfaction [i) 3:13
172:9 172:13 174:I 1
197:21 201:20 205:4
8:21
66:7 134:3 214:3 sheds [,) 162:15 35:4 35:9 172:24
215:17 sheet
[3117:17 19:14 simulated [1) 42:9
saturated [I] 89:11 seasoned [i] 172:19 septic 162:22
save [1) 209:1 seasons
[z] 104:10
[al 5:24
6:7 157:2 159.14 Shelly [I) 11:21 simulation [z] 42:12
86:5
saved [1) 195:8
saw
207:10 SEQRA [51 9:4 Sheriffs 111 34:6 Simultaneous [I)
[6) 85:7 86.14 seat [1] 15.4
46:10 134:1 134:14 Ship [a) 105:6 106:16 188:17
86:18 149:13 158:15 second [s) 30:2
167:13 106:22 169:19 simultaneously
[I]
Peggy Shirt[i) 20018 189:13
A sexy - Court Reporter 656-9634
(518)
3-74
Public Hearing
CondenseItTI-I
singing [I] 205:12 socks [I] 40:23 166:15
Slnl;ing - StreDgt11e1[
single [sl 54:1
Soft [11 63:21
splendor [Il 205:16
69:20 121:9 161:1
161:3
I span [11 110:20
softer [I] 13:17 SPDES [2l
spoil [11 131:8
79:18 113:18 122;16
134:8 134:12 134:16
134:16
Sip[31 I4:23 15:12 Soil [IJ 74:6
] 60:5
160:6
spoils [I] 22:4
263 9 134:11
23:12 Soils 6 74:8
[ J 74:17
sisters [I] 91:14 7422 77:6 145:12
speak[i11 15:13
36:20 77:23 78:3
s oke 2
1 1:2 [ J 97:4
06.21 209:14
statements �] 46:1
187:24
sit [6) 96:21 135:17 sold[3] 79:9
206:13
80:20 88:4 101:22 Spoken [ z] 119:11
159:1 197:8 P 5.18 states [25]
-
136:15 137:11 147:15
152:9
267:15
208:11
201:2
201:4
21:6
sponsor[Il 196:21 25:5 25:23
site [I91 29:20 34:23
solely [I] 2012 speaker [63] 15:7
solid 23:4 23:20 36:21
.26:11
28:13 29:8 30:3
sponsored [I] 198:16 36:23 38:12 40:21
sponsorship
51:12 53:12 54:6
[3] 201:24 202:3 47:24
[z181:8
41:23 45:4 46:3
55:6 106:20 106:22 205:7
56:11 60:1
65:10 65:16
81:24
49:11 50:4 50:13
118:12 118:23 119:22 Solution [67 35:7
120:5
66:9
s POrt [I] 94:10
50:20 53:9 54:20
120:8 120:12 47:14 75:12 105:5 80:14 81:24 82:1
144:9 144:14 186:7 106:14 106:16 82:21 81:8
Spot [I) 125:20
55:2 55:8 55:19
117:19 120:21
194:7 194:13
sites 54:22
solutions [zl 34:21
183:4
91:10
82:24 88:5 91:10 Spots [I] 130:5
96:24 101:20 107:15 spring [I] 75:3
213:1
station [4] 68:16
[� 55:7
55:19 120:2 120:14
Solve [11123:15
111:13 113:14 116:8
] 16:11 121:2 123:23
Springs [31 I:20
69:6 69:10 69:20
stations [a]
'
186:3 186:5
sits 22:19
solving124:20
[IJ 61:21
98:17 ] 70:14
128:5 134:21 stack [I] 83:6
69:3
69:8 70:4 184;22
[I]
situation [6) 35:18
someone 1
[ ] 189:5
134:23 135:2 138:7
138:14 140:21 J43:22 stacked [21 33:15
Stay[31 29:20 179:10
200:23
58:11 59:3 74:23
Someplace[,] 141:17
J44:8 147:6 149:7
4224
stayed 1
[ ]
80:6 197:24
Sometimes [21 6J:6
198:4
151:20 151:24 153:20 stackingy
[2] 26.2]
163:14
183:21
stays 32:1
situations [21 25:11
169:8 169:10 35:20
[37 49:10
204:
[6
34:12
somewhere [2] 136:5
141:10
171:11 176:6 178:4
180:17 183:22 184:3
staff [81 4:18 55:20
Stec [ ] 9J:8
SIX 6 2I:8 21:12
38:6 38:19 39:12
song [I] I40:16
189:23 191:6 191:10
116:7 172:9 172:19
205:6 207:11 214:8
J01:19
101:24 101:24 169:19
'
44:16 48:10 50:7
Sons [I] 140:24
191:13 193:3 196:8
200:11 203:14 207:6
stage [2] 194:4 194:5
187:19
Stein [21123:22
55:5 55:7 55:18
56:2 68:15 70:11
soon [21 J 84:13 205:5
210:10 212:9
stamp [I] 125:15
123:24
stenography [I] 184:12
70:14 10:21 74:5
sorry [31136:10 193:2
193:21
s Bakers ]
P [Ia 23:17
36:18 138:10
stand [2] 112:10
118:24
Step [41 126:16 126:18
'
:9 ::24
9599
:23 :3 99:9
sort [31 126:4 126:12
168:20
16823 177:22 178:14
179:21
standard [a] 7:17
133:21 133:23
Steven
100:6 111:8 118:19
126:22
J96:10 197:7
1200:7 210:8
.31:11 42:4 4Y:7
[Il 192:23
sticking1
136:22 137:15 140:8
178:9
sou t Il 44:3
[
213:19
standards 131 7220
72:23
[:] 150:19
Still 11a1 7:20
'
140:14 161:10
178:5 209:18 211:23
sound [as1 12:10
] 3:9 15:10 15:10
speaking [41 65:13
77:20
77:16
Starbuck [27 194:21
19:12
51:10 66:9 66:11
51:10 66:9 66:11
212:21
15:15 15:17 15:19
129:21 132:2
195:16
six -thirty [1) 131:16
16:1 16:7 16:9
speaks [11 194:3
Stark [2] 65:7
157:5 178:18 178:19
182:6
size141 65:20 67:1
J6:J9 17:5 17:10
21:6
special[6] 25:11
104:11
77:22
205:18 214:1
stipulate 1
P
71:13 124:8
21:7 21:9
2J 23 22:9 22:15
163:23 164:21
17823 179:4
Start[91 14:17 15:8
[ I 155:2J
stock[3196:3 95:24
ski [I] 97:8
91:24
22:1skiing[i1
16:19 25:21 63:15
100:10 17J:23
skilled[I] 175J
59:68 62:16 112:16
117:20 142:16 146:J2
specialize[ l 108:15
212:5
212:5
stockholders [11
105:11
skin [I] 40:I2
153:4 153:17 164:14
s
specific [s] 13:12
started 38:14
92:8
stone [I] 170:2
skip [31 117:16 120:I8
] 64:15 166:11 169:24
170:3
37:15 44:24 112:4
154:20
97:15 97:23
100:14 201:19 208:18
Stop [11 148:9
l
slated
ted
170:10 170:18
170:24 181:20 J81:22
specifically [s] 37:23
210:18 211:3
store 121 40:17 106:5
[11 129:13
slide7:13
182:3 182:5 182:10
182:14
125:12 ] 32:3 133:17
180:13
starting [I] ] 69:1
Stories [1] 39:1
[2] 93:1
J91:20
starts[zl 65:13
storm[I9] 10:22
slight [i] 146:18
sounds [a] 17;12
specification 111
66:17
45:12 6721 71:6
Slightly [Il 76:3
21:21 63:15 170:7
71:16
startups [11 32:24
73:24 76:5 83:16
Slopes [I] 146:6
source 141 17:10
specifications [I]
State [IaJ 6:1
102,24 109:3 113:21
Slow [[1 209:2
26:24 87:9 l I8:3
71:12
31:14 31:15 74:1
114. 3 115:3 115:6
small [Iol 42:17
Sources [2] 73:7
l 18:8
seed [1] 40:20
P
81:12 89:21 102:8
123:9 133:24
J 15:22 116:12 131:4
I47:21 ]76:24 180:13
43:4 81:16 99:2
112:16 118:19 125:16
south [161. 26:15
speeds [I] 42:3
spelled [I] 154:22
156:21
160:6 182:1 185:8
Story [11) 24:7
J49:10 149:17 165:23
26:19 26:23 27:3
spend131 98:7
185:23 186:13 194:11
198:20 215:6
24:11 39:14 95:21
97:2 97:13
smoking [Il 3:21
3543 36:1 58:8
62:11 67:19 70:20
100:2 204:17
States [I] 194:19
97:15
100:22 125:2 138:16
snarl 11] 131:18
104:2 160:3 170:7
spending [41 96:13 state-of-the-art [I]
148:23
snarls [I] 30:14
187:4 206:5 207:8
96:14 174:16 179:14
39:5
straight [11 91:3
snorkle [z] 138:23
Southbound [I] 43:9
spent [12] 6:4 statement Pool 2.15 strangers [I] 137:6
149:22
southern 72]
i
[ ]
13:14 56:12 56:13
94:2
2:15 3:5 3;12 strategy
[I] 39:20
snorklin g [I] 139:12
SPAC [11 207:24
96:11 97:16
98:5 98:19 105:8
5:9 9:6 23:9 street [41 1:14 i
26:16
Social [I] 16620 space [I] 119:21
149:8 20421
28:19 30:1
45:5 48:5
30:5 J 53:21 157.15
society [IJ 211:10 Spaces 121 83:24 spite [I] 6:3
51:14 Streets
78:6 78:7 78.9
1
[ l
11
78:13 78:15 78:17 Strengthen
52:14
[IJ 2:8
Peggy A1exy - Court Reporter (518) 656-9634
`
_
3 5 7
'
Public H -
earing
tolerable [il 128:10
CondenseIt"
158:14 159:2 ]41 24 204:12
tomorrow [1) 169:1 160:11 160:18
tolerable - using
'
165:9 206:5
Tompkins [1) 143:20 165:10 165:18 166:19 traveling t4] 56:20 turning undoubtedly [1]
g
tonight 1341 2:24 167:7 180.5 59:11 62:10 141:17 148:4 20420 35:4 43:13
180:18
traves unemployment
4:6 4:19 9:6 185:9 196:1 196:18 ty [z] 102:14 turns [3) 27:12
198:18
14:18 36:12 55:24 40:19 31:13p 19�7 197:19
199:4 199:16 106:13 204.23
203:15
66:7 78:11 80:23 203:20 204:5 treated 13] 142:15 twelve unhappy[') 181:5
88:12 91:12 92:13 205:21 207:2 213:15 145:10 145:11 11) 105:14 Union 1
[)
213:23 214:2 100:21
93:23 95:13 99:14 214:5 treatment [17] 6:2� [1] 16:14 United
town
109:6 113:10 114:13 s [3) - 3:11
[21 55:8
12:7 12:8 32:17 Twicwood [14l 17:2 55:19
I26:21 133:15 133:22 3:12 134:6
142:14 144:17 168:23 townhouses 156:19
73:15 72:8 73:17 17:13 17:23 19:5 Universal )
108:23 116:16 219 22:10 22:16 [ ] 129.18
[1l 116:22
176:13 176:19 185:22 towns 12) 31:9 126:10 139:20 169:21 53:12 55:4 56:12 unless 12) 135:16
190:2 191:17 194:2 5522
212:17
185:5 190:12 190:15 59:13 163:15 171:18 154:16
213:20 213:21 190:20 193:22 unlike [2) 83:15
tonight's [2) 2:9 toxins [1] 145:5 twists 1 212:16
tree67:18 [) 40:19
16:15 track 14139:22 98:19
85: 0
98:19 100:21
two 1351 4:15 20:75 Unnecessary,,]
too 1121 13:20 28:10 tracks 11)
39:6
trees [46l 17:9 27:13 28:4 28:11 90.-14
47:20 95:14 62:24 21:19 21:24 22:13 31:9 42:23 50:7 unPOPular [1l 78:2
129:5 152:4 168:10 trade[4) 77:17 91:16 22:17 51:20 56:12
'
22:22 46:22 56:14 unquote[3] 165:15
191:23 193:23 195:2 108:15 159:18 49:17 50:9 58:22 103:4 103:10 105:17 167:1 168:1
195:18 traded [11 95:24 69:15 70:7 71:13 105:19 109.6 115:18 unstudied [1) 23:24
took[7) 114:3 154:4 Trading12) 71,14 71:19 71:20 117:5 124:5 126:16
80;6
156:4 l57:24 I82:2 139:9
unsubstantiated 1
84:24 85:1 103:6 131:12 131:12 135:6 [ )
l 82.2 199:24 traffic(781 7:24
tools [1) 175:7 8:15
103:11 110:1 112:5 158:6 ) 61:11 162:15 23:24
112:13 119:5 122:21 163:21 179A 186:10 untold[tl 22:4
10:20 11:2]
to 25:7 25:10 45:22
p [3) 22:18 42:24
189:6 189:22 194:5 unused[il 130:6
136:2 130:20 130:21 197:16 208:13
I36:18
'
145:8 26:1 26:12 27:1
topography [51 41:22 27:5 27:9 27:11
210:g
I39:8 140:2 unwanted i
142:17 l 42:19 145.23 type 131 7:17 47:10 [) 59:23
147:19 147:24 152:14 UP 1731 3:17 4:8
46:20 49:4 27:22 2723 28:12
150:20 9:115:
117.21
118:17 28:22 29:23 30:5
150:23 165:7 165:20 types [i) 101:9 13:9
165:23
30:14 31:1 31:10
total [41 72:13 115:3 31:24
14:19
166:8 182:3 )cal 1 23:3
182:9 7 82:11 I93:12 typ [) 50:15 32:18 34:3
'
32:4 32.14
152:24 178:20 33:5 33:11
U.S [2) 31:3 gg;12 34:19 56:9 57:10
tremendous [al 79:16 61:6
33:15
totally[11 62:17 34:1 34:22 45:11
61:11 62:24
81:3 85:17 ]01:16 ultimate[z] 8:20 66:22 80:2
Touba [1) 70:18 52:14 52:15 52:19
5224
82:19
trend [1) 37:22 28:2 85:19 85:21 87:8
unable
touch [11 142:3 53:7 53:13
[11 33:19 87:11 88:11 89:19
trends 11) 42:6
'
touched 1 562 56:13 56:14
[ l 161:23 57:7
tried [a] 10:14 83:6 122 24�Ptable [11 97:3 98;22 96:3
.57:8 57:16
tourism [9) 98:9 58:10 58:15 58:23
99:10 99:21
100:6 144:8
trip unanimously [1] 112:23 116:2 124:24
177:5 60:11 60:14 61:6
177:8 204:11 204:23 61:17 61:20
p 121 26:24 30:3 176:20 134:13 13518 . 140:19
trips [11 30:6 144:2
61:22
208:8 210:4 61:23 61:24 62:2
144:3 144:4
unchanged [1) 54:23 149:8 149:70 149:I1
troublesome [1]
tourist [6] 52:9 62:12 75:24 80:9
under s
33:12 1 1 30:2 150:19 152:15 156:20
83:21
98:11 99:6 132:12 93:6 94:9 95:15
208:2 208:7 103:17 104:16
111:9 133:23 157:9 157:13 157:16
truck [n) 53:15 182:7 193:18 160:10
109:21
tourists [6) �8:13 113:2 115:13 121:1
160:12 160:16
trucking [1) 175:12 underemployment 111 161:23 168:16 171:17
41:21 151:10 195:17 126:12 129:22 131:10
trucks z 197:19 181:22 182:3 183:9
[) 34 :17
201:14 204:17 131:21 136:14 136:16
62:24 underneath [3l 83:19 18321 184:6 185:1
towards 146:19 148:2 17623
[ 7 119:2 199:10
true [6) 154:18 190.12 161:14 162:11 185:4 185.7 187.4
206:6
129:7 147.17 148:5 trail131 85:13
190:14 190:16 204:11 underpass 189:2 191:1 191:4
215:9 �) 7:19 191:18 195:15
I SO:I8 86:6
723 206.4
86:10 199:6 199:9
towards 11) ) 70; l
trul 212:13 214:9 `
y [4147:13 75:6 understand [1a) 5:13
tower trailer[i) 15:23
�) 85.12
update 1
'. 113:5 173:7 9:7 57:13 5:134 p [ 1 3723
85:15 trained [1) 86:15
trust [1) 77:11 7820 78:21 95:12 updated [1) 146:21
tranquility
town 173) 2:5 q ty [1) 77:17
transcript
96:16 98:9 111:24 updatin
trY [10l 5:11 13:15 ] 27:12 ) 54:14 11158 u g [11 199.17
59'9 83:11 13
2:6 2:9 3:7 [21 184:13
:24
pgrade [1) 6:10
113:22 160:13 161:5
24:8 24:11 28:9 215.9
161:22
125:8 139:11 183:3 upgrades [1 *1 33:1
183:3 173:19 177:5
32:19 33:4 35:8 transfer 1
[) 73:21
52:22 60:10 62:14
198:5
understandable 11) upgrading [1l 6:6
tryrng 181 7:4
transform 1
64:10 64:14 64:21 [ ] 64:10
96:6 urge [1) 14521
14:2 59:14 83:10
65:4 78:24 82:4 transportation 141
94:21 104:23 198:22 undertaken [1) )26;18 LTSA 11) 172:2
95:22 97:2 97:13 195:12 198:17 198:21
199:3
199:18 underway[5) 4:20 used[1rl 33:24
97.15 98:10 99:9
107:9 117:4 119:20 trapped
Tuesday[21 1:8 32:7 189.2 189:3 34:7 3920 50:14
3*16 189.18 69:4
'
[1) 36:6
69:10 82:19
125:2 126:13 128:22 traps 11l 75:18 85:18 87:9 103 turn [19) 3:19 14:21 Underwood 131 77:24 �
129:1 129:12 129:15 travel [s1 26;g
130:7 130:11
82:13 88:6 138:19 149:10 149:14
33:19 36:2 58:9 149:16
130:16 35:2 58:19 91:8
131:19 138:16 141:16 132:14
169:14 174:14
60:24 61:13 61:15 undesirable 11) 47:11 195:11.
82:9
143:15 145:17 147:23 travelers [2]
116.8 119:3 undevelopable 111 uses [2) 25:1 25:3
131:14 148:8 148:11 j
9.23
148:23 157:72 158:11 33:18
148:12 148:13 179.17 using[6) 19:24 f
Peggy A1exy - Court Reporter (518) 656-9634 27:2 29:14 69:2
3-76
Public Hearing
115:14 121:3
CondenseltT`
usually [2) 5q;g
visiting [z) 26:6
204:13
ally y�
180:14 181:7 187:12 146:7 159:24
54:18[
Visitor[31 51:2
188:15 190:24
watch 2
160:21 wooded l 46:16
167:10 168:7 193:10 130:10 165:13
utilizing (1) 53:1
51:16 121:19
[ l 6:22
7:1
193:16
166:16
wooden
vacuum [I) 15:22 visitors 19] 5:17
watched i
[ 1 98:4
wetlands [12l 16:1
10:7 45:12
[') 92:21
woods [3)
valuable [2) 24:15 8:23 41:19 52:10 watcher [,) 6;24
72:10
56:5
74:15 74:16 86;21
46:7
92:16 166:1
179:1 99;19
value 2 179:9 179:10
aloe [) 171:4
water [66) 6:2
102:12 102:18 145:5 word [3143:14 144:10
171:5
visits [1) 204:15
6:7160:4
45: 16:1 67:10
45:13 56:1 67:10
169:15
whatnot [ll
192:19
words
values 161 109:7
109:11
vistas ,
[) 132:24 67:21 68:3 68:10
142:7 [1] )33:5
Wheeler['] 11:24 worked
109:15 156:17
156:18 181:9
visual [27) 10:19
41:17 42;11
70:1 71:6 73:24
wheels [21 13:17
['3] 11:11
11:13 12:6 12:11
vantage [1) 130:24
42:12
42:14 42:15 42:21
74:3 74:15 74:22
75:6 76:5 83:16
94:Y2
12:13 13:7
125:1 �47:20
variances [') 111:11
43:2 43:19 45:14
45:17 46:17 67:16
83:20 86:22 88:2
88:10 89:10
142:5
whereas [1) 187:23 155:16 156:15 147:20
15
whisper[']
variety [31 50:13
130:23 174:18
91:4
85:5 122:18 130:24 92:21 92:23 93:11
15:20
whistle [1] 205:14
workers
142:22 �] 142:11
various[2) 43:6
140:4 153:15 153:16 97:10 102:24 103:21
160:22 161:9 161:20 108:17 109:3 I12:14
white '
[) 112:11 World[61 38:9
47:11
176:24 180:14 199:15 112:21 113:21 114:20
Wh1tt3' [a] 138:5
40:8 91:18 91:19
vast [5] 47:20 87:15
199:19 200:4
114:23 115:3 115.6
138:5 138:8 149:9
93:2 132:8
89:8 91:4 128:18 visualize [11 57:21
115:21 115:22 115:24
whole ['o] 12:16
worldwide [') 55:8
vastly [1] 153:14
visuall Y[1] 70:23
116:12 121:8 121:11
48:13 78:16 79:12
worried '
[ ] 15:18
vegetation [s) 22:12
50:4
voiced [1] 153:I 1
131:4 132:23 137:20
139:11 139:18 142:15
95:13 98:21 137:2
150:17 153:3 157:20 worse [a)
71:18 162:1
162:4
void ['] 159:13
145:7 145:9 145:10
wide [3] 50:5 170:12
93:16 182:13
182:1
vehicle [') 57:18
V011aro [11 1:11
145:11 147:21 149:15
179:8
wreck
wick ['] 111:19
vehicles [s] 25:8
volume ['o] 25:22
36:22
176:24 180:14 183:17
191:20 192:5 192:11
wife [3] 107:20 130:7
Writing
g [) 48:9
33fi g- 190.3 48:9
34:13 36:2 57:20
41:23 46:2
46:2 46:6 72:5
192:14 192:16
119:19
wife's
en
145:3
vehicular[3)
72:12 72:13 129:2
waters [3] 71:1
73:19
[1) 119:14
wildlife [1) 86:12
�4 3:17 4 16
66:8
29:7
voluminous [1) 23:22
188:1
114:16 116:9
31:18 53:13
volunteer[21 195:15
watershed fill 48:15
William [2) 190?3
134:3 151:16 155:22
vendors['] 173:13
203:17
73:5 73:19 75;17
195:13
213:24 214:2 214:4
venture [1) 132:13
volunteered [1) 194:22
willing 77:))
wrong 131 144:16
venue [1] 6:20
volunteers [11 81:15
112:20 116:21 1170
145:19
153:6 1
167:9
Wincrest ,
[) 62:8
150:22 186:18
wrote [2l
verbal 2
[ l 66:6
751:15
vulnerable 111 129:11
watershed's [,)117:7
window [2] 135:7
65:16
192:7
verbally['] 48:8
W [a) 140:22 140:22
Watkins [i1 124:19
170:8
yard [4] 22:4 51:21
verify [2) 26:22
140:24 140:24
Wait 66:18
ways [a] 28:8 97:22
windows [1] 164:24
128:12 147:15
75.8
[,]
waiting1
148:19 202:19
wearing
winging [,] i1;:) 7
yards [1] 82:20
version [') 209:16
[ ] 59:8
Wal-Mart[2) 157:12
[1] 113;9
web [2] 54:6 55:6
winner[,] 172:3
wish 4:9
year[32] 6:9 11:3
versus [') 73:21
via
158:11
week [2] 98:22 206:3
pi 91:5
113:9 123:17 133:7
25:24 26:26 31:63
31:7
[17 73:14
viable [2] 34:8
walk [1] 123:2
weeks 12] 56:12
146:24 212:5
31:10 31:21
31:22 59:8 83:5
89:3
walking [2] 138:21
56:14
within [14) 6:11
89:4 89:4 89:12
vice 121 5:5 38:21
146:15
walkway[i] 33:7
weigh [4] 3:1
123:19 124:17 166:19
19:15 37:7 39:24
91:11 93:15 93:16
110:20
vicinity 11) 185:10
walkways ' 39:22
Y [ 7
weighing 1
g g [ I 77:15
68:6 70:12 117:6
120:23 182:6
120:
124: 143:6
165:23 172:1
view [s] 42:15 67:15
85:12
walls [5] 129:17
weight (1) 27:14
122:1
122:17 182:16
185:23
177:4
165:2 172:17 177:10
179:9
85:18 85:18
162:7 188:15
164:15 166:11 181:22
] 82:4wl
welcome [1) 44:21 without [6] 27:24
180:1 .209.4
year-round [6] 64;24
view
viewed[') 188:17
Walter['] 11:24
54:3
61:2 81:23 151:10
173:
112:13 125:22 153:22
views [4) 42:9
56:6 91:24 163.17
wants [1] 214:8
54:5-be7:12
well-known 1 34:18 N SS [) 15:15
[ ] WITNESS[1)
Yearly 4 172:12
205:6
village [2) 156:16
warn [1] 153:13
west [17) 9:15
191:2
Years [58] 6:5
185:3
Warren [zz] 31:11
16:23 28:24 59:19
witnessed ['] 111:17
37:3 38:15 41:1
violation [i) 77:14
33:22 34:5 34:8
74:6
62:11 67:15 102:13 witnessing [11 104:1
43:24 43:24 44:8
violations [') 77:10
.99:5 99:11
99:21 176:3 176:3
104:4 119:2 130:15 woman [1) 136:20
150:18 160:1 165:7
52:7 54:24 78:22
79:3 88.7
Virginia [1] 151:18
176:16 178:21 180:8
wonder 6
165:12 166:17 185:2 [) 82:20
84:19
92:18
95:9 97:3 98:5
virtual [') 129;7
v��Y[1] 131:13
184:17 184:18 186:8 199:4 127:7 163.2
188:21 188:24 189:7 westbound [1] 33:18 163:7 199:11
]00:8 100:9 ]02:4
103:8 103:9 103:11
visibility
isi tY 121 58:13
199:5 199:8 208:9
Washington 31:12
wonderful[']
western [1) 38:9 wonderin
172:22
104:5 105:18 105:19
107.21 108:5
[1) wetland [23] 71:8 154:18 g [2] 58.1
waste
110:7
110:14 110:15 117:5
visible[3) 42:20
6:7 101:)I 108:)7
Wood
85:13 87:14 gg;2 m 69:3
138 6
43:5 54:8 175:17
visit[2) 149:24 179:11 wastewater[9] 12:6
97.14 97:19 144:9 93:14 95:16 138:17
158:6 208:19 208:24
139:7 139:8
149:92 152:4
163:22 169.14 178:2
visited ['] 208:16
12:7 52:18 176:23
139:15 r
144:11 145:2 145:12 Woods [,) 207:13
178:8 i80:20 191:15
192:9
195:14 200:15
Peggy Alexy - Court Reporter (518) 656-9634
200:22 202:4 203:16
3-77
SECTION 3.3
WRITTEN COMMENTS
I
u
1
I
I
I
F
TONVN OF QUEENSBURY
742 Bay Road, Queensbury, NY 12804-5902 518-761-8201
Comments on the DGEIS for the Great Escape
Received through 9//13/00
9/12/00
Joseph & Claire Trombley
9/11/00
James Horwitz
9/11/00
Walter Law
9/11/00
Denise Paddock
9/11/00
Richard Carlson (NYSDOT)
9/11/00
Rec'd. from LG Chamber of Commerce
9/10/00
Thomas & Michele Mayer
9/9/00
Virginia Etu
9/6/00
James Merrigan
9/6/00
Kenneth Hopper, M.D.
9/5/00
Mark Prendeville
9/5/00
Robert Westcott, D.D.S.
9/4/00
Sharon Nicpon
9/1/00
Stuart Mesinger
8/31/00
Patricia Davison
8/31 /00
Douglas Petroski, M.D.
8/30/00
E. Peter Marshall
8/30/00
Carol Eppich
8/30/00
Kevin Dineen
8/30/00
Donna Harubin
8/29/00
Steven Johnson
8/29/00
Erwin & Virginia Funk
8/29/00
Roger Boor
8/29/00
Karen Angleson
8/29/00
Rec'd. from Donald Milne
8/28/00
Genevieve May, Charles Nacy
8/25/00
Deborah Roberts
8/1/00
Mark Hoffman
Undated
Dale Nemer
Undated
Unsigned
3-79
"HOME OF NATURAL BEAUTY ... A GOOD PLACE TO LIVE"
SETTLED 1763
t� 6, M5
Cc-' C6�
Mr. Craig MacEwan
Queensbury Planning Board
C/O Queensbury Town Clerk
Dear Craig,
August 1, 2000
RECEIVED
AUG 0 4 2000
TOWN OF QUEKNSB14/1
PLANN':NG OFFICE
Citizens for Queensbury respectfully requests an extension of thirty days of
the public comment period for the DGEIS provided by the Great Escape.
Due to the technical complexity of the material, we believe additional time is
needed to thoroughly examine the study.
We would also like to request that additional hearings be held after the initial
hearing for further review of the issues.
Sincerely,
r
Mark Hoffman
3-80
1 ,(
ROBERTS ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING, INC.
1
MEMORANDUM
1
1 TO: Environmental Committee DATE: August 25, 2000
FROM: D. Roberts
SUBJECT: Great Escape DGEIS
1 I spent a couple of hours reviewing the Great Escape DGDGEIS. Below I have provided my comments for
your review. I focused my review on the proposed clearing/planting and visual impacts of the parking. I
1 alto looked at wetland issues, water quality and wastewater disposal. I am concerned about the proposed
stormwater and wastewater disposal, but I am not certain about some of the technical issues. Maybe Tom
Jarrett can add something to my comments. I also am not comfortable with the visual impact analysis of
1 the generic 200 ft tall structure. I think the analysis is weak, but did not spend a lot of time on this and I
did not comment. Can someone else comment on it?
1 The comments need to be submitted by September 11. I think we should have a special meeting on
September 5 to put our comments together and submit them to the Town Board. Please provide any
1 comments you have to me either on my comments, or other issues. Also please let me know if you can
attend a meeting on Sept. 5.
1 My initial comments are as follows:
• A major visual impact (and potential environmental impact) of the proposed expansion will be the
1 construction of the large parking facilities in Area C, increasing the parking from 2,600 spaces to
4,000 spaces. The need for this parking is unclear from a total park use perspective. Currently, the
existing parking allows for crowds in the park that frequently result in lines of more than 1 hour at
1 most of the popular rides/shows. Consequently, the park under existing build -out seems near
capacity. If the number of activities within the park is not expanded by 2-fold, then it seems
1 unnecessary to nearly double the parking capacity. It does not seem reasonable to assume that
without considerable increase in facilities within the park, crowds warranting the extensive parking
proposed are going to turn out to wait in two -hour-long lines.
1 '. • Section 5, page 5-1 states that the proposed loss of vegetation is unavoidable. Some of the loss of
the proposed 11.5 acres of forest could be reasonably avoided and more thoroughly mitigated.
1 Figure 4-1? shows that all of the mature trees/shrubs will be removed along the Northway right-of-
way to accommodate the expanded parking. The proposed plantings in figure 2-4 appear to be
insufficient to provide a visual barrier from the Northway or from Route 9. Since the amount of
' parking is in excess of what seems to be reasonably needed for the park facilities (see comment
above), the width of the buffer along the Northway should be increased and some of the large
r mature trees left in place. In addition, the planting scheme should be sufficient to ensure the view
' of the massive paved parking area is fully mitigated from both major roadways. This should include
1 3-81
' a monitoring plan for the plantings, and a commitment to ensure survival or replanting of trees and
shrubs for 3 years after planting.
�' • The DGEIS concludes that there will be no significant long-term cumulative effects on aquatic
ecology. The information provided is insufficient to support this statement. Potential contributions
' to surface water degradation include stormwater run-off, wastewater discharge and to a lesser
extent, waterfowl use. The potential for long-term degradation of water quality from nutrient
loading resulting from the watstewater discharge is addressed in the next comment. The stormwater
' plan provides detailed information on how the quantity of stormwater will be treated in order to
remain at or below existing conditions. However, the DGEIS does not address stormwater quality.
,( The discharge of the stormwater goes to sensitive aquatic systems and data to support the
' contention that there will not be long-term degradation of surface water quality resulting from the
significant increase in impervious surfaces proposed by the project.
An existing condition within the park that adds to degradation of water quality is the presence of
waterfowl within the main stream. Populations of waterfowl may also utilize the proposed
' stormwater ponds. As mitigation for potential water quality impacts, the Great Escape should
implement low-cost measure to manage the water fowl populations. Allowing vegetation to grow
r alongthe bank of the stream fencing and in articular, si a e disco the guests from
g P � l� g ��g b
t feeding the ducks, should be used to discourage the large resident population from over -use of this
section of the stream Water fowl are notorious for increasing nutrient and coliform contamination
in surface water and a proper management program should be implemented An education program
t with simple signs requesting the guests not to feed the ducks would be beneficial along the existing
retaurant facilites near Subway and Itza Pizzeria.
t ,r
• Page 3-4 states that no activities will involve or intercept with groundwater resources. However,
the document also states that the high groundwater table is within 6 feet of the surface during parts
' of the year. In addition, page 2-14 indicates that the effluent from the preferred wastewater
treatment alternative will be discharged to a deep sandy soil, which will further reduce nutrient
' pollution to the regional groundwater system. The design flows for the wastewater treatment
system are up to 95,000 GPD (gallons per day). The treated effluent limit for total phosphorus (the
nutrient with the greatest potential for contamination of surface water) is 0.5 mg/L. The surface
water concentrations of total phosphorous in the surrounding wetlands and the final receiving
' waters of Glen Lake are 1 to 2 orders of magnitude less than this effluent concentration. The
surface water concentrations of total phosphorus (TP) in tributaries to Glen Lake range from 0.009
' to 0.040 mg/L TP. Unless the separation from the groundwater and ultimate discharge to surface
water is capable of continuously removing a substantial load of TP from the effluent, indefinitely,
during all flow conditions, a potential for significant impact to water quality exists. The DGEIS
t does not provide sufficient information regarding the groundwater or soil conditions, or the
proposed wastewater disposal system in section 2.1.10 or Appendix 6 to support the statement that
ground water or surface water will not be impacted by the proposed discharge.
I
' 3-82
L I
I
11,
THE "MONDACK RUNNERS
P.O. Box 2245
Gieas Falls, New York 12801
Officers:
President: Gertmeve May
Vice President: Chuck Nacy
Treasurer: Mario Sager
Secretary: Amy Hoffer
August 28, 2000
Queensbury Planning Board
Town Offices
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
Dear Board Members,
This letter is in support of the civic responsibility that the Great Escape demonstrates
I through its annual sponsorship of our Prospect Mountain Road Race, the proceeds of
which are donated to help fimd the Michelle Lafontaine ACC Nursing Scholarship.
Without this generous backing, our club would be unable to direct substantive dollar
amounts to this scholarship that, in turn, provides the double advantage of aiding area
students entering the nursing profession, along with the potential for the surrounding
communities to benefit from their care.
ISincerely,
The Adirondack Runners
I
Genevieve May, President Charles T. Nacy, Vice-PrF/a
1
1 3-83
(�C/a0 ' S<« a
I
11
H
INTRODUCTION
Before commenting on the document directly, I must express deep concern for the lack of time to
prepare our analysis and commentary. The consultants for the Park have had since last
November to prepare the document and have had data in hand since early 1999. Its' size,
amounting to more than 600 pages, requires time to read and digest. In addition, those
neighborhoods affected must read it to determine which questions require analysis by
professional consultants, then hire those consultants and receive their input. The time frame
allotted does not allow for that. We respectfully ask that additional time and additional hearings
be scheduled.
This document is notable not only for its size. It is notable for its numerous omissions,
errors, misstatements and contradictions
It goes overboard in attempting to emphasize the economic benefits of the
Park to the Community while minimizing it adverse impacts upon our
community.
In the second page of the executive summary, it tells us that the project is intended to
accommodate growth in patronage while providing for "improved levels of
environmental quality for potential impacts on ...water quality, wetlands
Protection, stormwater management, ...visual impacts, community character,
and audible noise."
I, respectfully, ask the Board if we are to believe that the addition of a 200 foot
high roller coaster in front of our view of West Mountain improves the visual
quality of the sight.
I, respectfully, ask the Board if the removal of every tree from the area of the
Samoset Motel South to the Coach House Restaurant will result in im roved
levels of stormwater management in that area.
I, respectfully ask the Board if the collection of run-off from parking lots on
which 4500 cars have been leaking oils, gasoline and antifreeze will im rove
our water quality.
It is our intent to now describe to the Board some of the ommisions
contradictions, misstatements and errors in this document.
H
3-84
OMISSIONS
• The scoping document (pg.4, 2°a paragraph) states that, "The noise levels to be
produced by the Park within the adjacent DEGEIS area ... shall be modeled...
Such modeling shall consider the effect on properties across Glen Lake that may be
affected by noise carrying over water."
The DGEIS submitted does not include modeling or studies of noise levels on
properties other than 6 houses adiacent to a monitoring station on Birdsall Rd
Their studies completely ignore and omit noise which has caused residents of.
' Fitzgerald Rd., Ash Dr., Mannis Rd- Hall Rd., Jay Rd Ivy Rd., Glen Lake Rd
and others to complain of noise from the Park.
tAgain, the scoping doc. calls for studies of noise levels , "on properties across
Glen Lake that may be affected by noise carrying over water."
The consultants adhered to the limits put forth in one other part of the scoping doc.
which called for an "apples to apples" comparison which used the same monitoring
stations used when Mr. Wood had a SEQR prior to the construction of the Comet in
1990. However. thev did add one monitoring station in the Park which was not
included in the 1990 studv. Thev chose not to add any stations in other areas of
'
Glen Lake.
Notably, the station used for Glen Lake (behind the hill on Birdsall Rd) was in
'
an area where no resident complaints have been issued because the residents
claim that noise from the Park is blocked by the hill and the trees on the
forested area of the hill. In section 3.6.1 of the DGEIS the authors admit that
t
the monitoring site for Glen Lake is behind a hill which
blocks sound. They further state that the "hill is very
effective in limiting noise propagation."
The results from this single station are the basis for fallacious claims in the
'
DGEIS that noise is not a problem for Glen Lake.
' • Section 3.5.1 (pg3-22), describing land use and zoning, identifies the Glen Lake
neighborhood within the study area as "as group of six or seven homes located
along the southwesterly portion of Glen Lake about one-third of a mile from ... from
tthe Park." Figure 1-1 showing the project location map shows the primary study
area as including not just 6 or 7 properties on Birdsall Rd. (conveniently located
behind the hill), but includes all of the properties from the home owned by Touba on
the Northwest shore to Powell on the South shore. This includes thirty-four (34)
homes. In addition, then should have included all residences on Glen Lake since
they are impacted visually, audibly and by the increased nutrient loading of the
waters due to sewage and run-off from the Park.
1 3-85
1
11
11
• Section 3.5.1 (pg3-22), describing land use and zoning, identifies the Glen Lake
neighborhood within the study area as "as group of six or seven homes located along the
southwesterly portion of Glen Lake about one-third of a mile from ... from the Park" Figure
I-1 showing the project location map shows the primary study area as including not just 6
or 7 properties on Birdsall Rd. (conveniently located behind the hill), but includes all of the
properties from the home owned by Touba on the Northwest shore to Powell on the South
shore. This includes thirty-four (34) homes. In addition, they should have included 11
residences on Glen Lake since thev are impacted visualIL an Ibl-v and bv the increased
nutrient loading of the waters due to sewage and run-off from the Park.
❖ Will the Board require inclusion of these and all homes fronting Glen Lake in the impact
study?
• Stormwater analysis is omitted for Park Area A. Since area A is adjacent to the sensitive
wetland, this is important.
❖ Will the Board require that study?
• The document provides reference to plantings, but no specifications on the size of trees or
whether those plantings would be trees, shrubs or ground cover.
❖ Will the Board require such analysis and specification?
• In section 6, the authors include vegetation removal in a section on "irreversible commitment
of environmental resources." Removal of large trees such as those in the Northern part of
area C absorb large quantities of nutrients which do not reach groundwater.
❖ WiIl the Board require analysis of the effects on groundwater from this removal?
3-86
1
I SEWAGE
• There are errors in section 2.1.10 which bring into question all the data and conclusions in
this section. First, they indicate the volume of sewage from the current theme park as 45,
636 GPD. They then estimate that the Park with expansion will produce only 60,000 GPD.
' Based upon an increase in visitors from approximately 900,000 to 1.5 million (a factor of
1.5), the volume with expansion of the theme park should be 68,454 GPD. Therefore, their
total volume should be 103,454 GPD, not 95,000 GPD.
' •'• Will this be corrected and corrections made in the conclusions based upon this data?
• The DGEIS purports to show that the system proposed will produce effluent quality which is
significantly better that DEC standards. However, the proposed level for phosphorus
discharge (o.5mg/1) only just meets DEC potential effluent standards. Glen Lake cannot
biologically afford any additional phosphorous loading.
❖ Will measures of current phosphorous be taken and analysis of future phosphorous in Glen
Lake and the watershed be determined based upon this additional loading?
• Sources at DEC claim that phosphorous discharged to a river does not accumulate in the river
' as it does in a lake. This accumulation will result in a considerable degradation of the lake
over time. They strongly suggest that the sewage from an expanded park be handled via a
sewer line connecting it to the treatment plant at Glens Falls which is now operating at 50%
' of capacity.
❖ Will a comparison study of the effects of ammonia, phosphorous, and Biological Oxygen
' Demand on the watershed and waters of Glen Lake be done which compares the alternative
of local sewage treatment versus transfer of the sewage to the Glens Falls treatment plant via
a sewer line.
1
1 3-87
I STORIVRVATER MANAGEMENT
• They state fig! 4-9) that the groundwater will not be impacted because no gradingwill
occur at or below the water table level. The claim that the
'
is more that 6 feet below grade. Their evidence is a Warren SoilConservation Service
Report which claims that the groundwater water table in the Hinckley, Hinkle
y y
Plainfield and Oakvbille soils is at a depth of more than six feet.
'
I
challenge the assumption that the groundwater table is more than 6 feet below grade.
The basis for this chalenge is the following facts.
1. The land upon which the existing parking lots in area C are built is filled land upon
which gravel was placed over wetlands. The water table in those wetlands is at the
level of the Glen Lake Brook, not six feet below the parking lots.
'
2. Those soils mentioned above were brought in to raise the level of the land in area C
above the wetland upon which they are now located. Therefore, generalizations
regarding the normal water table below those soils does not apply. Additionally, that
fact should be known to the engineers formulating this report.
3. This spring those parking lots were completely flooded for an extended period of
time. That could not occur if the water table were truly more than 6 feet below grade.
•'• Will the Board require test borings to verify
' g data presented, as fact, in this document.
• The BOD5 (Biological Oxygen Demand) of raw sewage is 250 to 300 mg/l. The BOD5 of
ethylene glycol, which is the ingredient in automotive antifreeze is 5000mg/l. The cooling
systems of cars in the northeast is filled with a solution which is 50% antifreeze. In hot
t summer periods when parked a large percentage of cars leak this material. It will enter the
catch basins and retention basins provided in this stormwater management plan. Tom
knowledge, no provision has been made to trap this material and other
hydrocarbons to prevent their entrance to the watershed which enters Glen
Lake.
❖ Will traps or filters be employed to prevent hydrocarbons from entering groundwater?
❖ Hydrocarbons from route 9 have already been detected in the fen. (see Glen Lake Watershed
' Management Study) No analsis is made of additional hydrocarbons from route 9 due to
additional traffic generated. Will this be done?
• The DGEIS authors claim the project will only slightly increase or produce no increase in
nutrient loading due to storm water run-off. This is unacceptable at the Present time
because we are attempting to reduce nutrient loading of the Lake We have had two
algae blooms this year due to nutrient loading. We are working with residents on projects to
reduce nutrient loading from Lakeshore properties and have requested help from the Town
Highway Superintendent to reduce loading from road run-off.
❖ The DGEIS does not include figures on the current phosphorous levels in the Glen Lake
Brook in project area C. We also need data on levels in Park area A and the fen
immediately after the Park. Will these studies be added to this DGEIS?
3-88
6
SUMMATION
Due to the location of this property which is placed in an environmentally sensitive area (the
' wetland of the fen, the Glen Lake Brook and the lake itself) and its close proximity to
residential neighborhoods, its development must be limited. We cannot expect it to expand
as other parks such as Six Flags Park in Darien, which is surrounded by acres of farm land.
They must recognize that they purchased a piece of property which flawed for the purposes
they had in mind.
❖ What limits is the Board willing to put on this property?
A 200 FT HIGH ROLLER COASTER IS GREAT FUN, BUT IT IS A VISUAL
MONSTROSITY WHICH DOES NOT BELONG IN THE MIDST OF AN AREA WHICH
IS POPULATED ON THREE SIDES BY RESIDENTIAL AND LAKEFRONT
VACATION HOMES.
The screams of rollercoaster patrons should not be allowed which permeate residential
neighborhoods.
'
A SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT SHOULD NOT BE BUILT WHERE IT WILL
DISCHARGE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE LIMITS OF PHOSPHORUS INTO SOILS
THAT ARE IN THE GLEN LAKE WATERSHED ALREADY STRESSED WITH
NUTRIENTS.
tGiven
past code violations, are we willing to trust this corporation with the
rp well-being of our
valuable watershed?
WILL THIS BOARD TAKE INTO ACCOUNT PAST VIOLATION PATTERNS WHEN
WEIGHING DATA WHICH SHOW LMTS AT OR NEAR ALLOWABLE
STANDARDS?
PARKING AREAS SHOULD ONLY BE EXPANDED WHICH CAN ASSURE US THAT
' NO ADDITIONAL ETHYLENE GLYCOL OR OTHER AUTOMOTIVE
HYDROCARBONS WILL BE RELEASED TO THE GROUNDWATER OF THE
WATERSHED.
3-89
'
August
29,2000
Submission to: Queensbury Planning Board
Topic: D.G.E.I.S for The Great Escape
scape
Contents: Copy of Oral Critique of Traffic Impact Study
r
Submitted by:
Roger Boor, Vice President of The Citizens For Queensbury
3-90
1-
Critique
Traffic Impact Study
I The Great Escape
Although voluminous in raw data this study for the most part relies on unstudied,
' unsubstantiated assertions and the grossest of omissions. It is more an attempt to deceive
than to enlighten and many of the conclusions have little to do with the reality of what is
being proposed or the effects on the local public.
The Great Escape, formerly Story Town, serves as a prime example of how
recreational habits and their subsequent impacts can change over time. The theme park,
'
Story Town did not have the degree of negative impacts to the community that the
current ride park now has. The Queensbury Planning Board experienced and I hope
learned a valuable lesson when it innocently omitted or failed to secure a limit on
extended hours at the park. Extending the hours of operation should be a notice to all of
you that in fact the facility known as the Great Escape may in the future change again as
a result of changing recreational trends to something other than just a ride park or a
'
giant ride park Let's be sure not to overlook all the uses of this property with its current
zoning, realizing that say large festivals, concerts or other uses may eventually become
popular. In this study the applicant states that patrons leave over a long period of time
so there will be no negative traffic impacts created by exiting vehicles, yet, they are
festival Did look festival
seeking parking. the traffic study at situations or special events
where all patrons exit at once? The answer is no. This one assumption alone, the
assumption that exiting patrons will always be leaving over a long period of time
'
deserves very serious scrutiny by this board. What will occur when 30,000 patrons at the
Great Escape experience one of our afternoon thunderstorms or prolonged down pours
that starts say mid afternoon?
1 3-91
2
11
L
Volume 2 of the study (Traffic Impact) page 6 states:
During approximately 230 days of the year, the Great Escape generates essentially no
traffic and during approximately 250 days of the year, the Great Escape is closed during
the AM peak hour.
Concentrating the 1.5 million visiting patrons into 136 days is hardly a comfort to me,
or any one else that travels by or near the park during peak season.
Page 7 of the study, the last bullet states:
Approximately 80 percent of the peak hour traffic entering the Great Escape parking lots
approach from the north and approximately 20 percent approach from the south. The
ambiguities of this statement are obvious: of the 80% entering the park from the north,
what percentage is in fact coming from the south exiting I-87 at exit 20 and back tracking
to the park? Current stacking problems on north bound 87 would seem to verify that
perhaps points south are in fact a larger source of trip generation. Traffic counts for cars
exiting from the north onto the bridge and cars using the bridge to go south on I-87 are
conspicuously absent from all the other traffic counts shown in figures 3.1-3.30. They
are instead left in appendix A. of this manifest........... and disjoined from where their
interpretation might be more meaningful and enlightening.. The cornerstone of this
traffic study is that you not look at the bridge traffic and the opposing left hand turns that
must be made across traffic to access or exit I-87. This cornerstone, the two lane bridge,
fails by the shear weight of even the most cursory of glances. In this study and in reality
the Gurney Lane Bridge and its intersection with route 9 is but a house of cards,. As you
read this document you will see that the name. Gurney Lane is conspicuously absent from
almost all commentary and analysis. Can a professional traffic engineering firm make
any assertions about traffic in the area without looking at the Gurney Lane Bridge, its
intersection with Route 9 and its ultimate level of service capabilities.
Is a 2 lane bridge going to be able to handle the future demands of our growing
community and also provide safe and timely egress and ingress to the Great Escape? Of
3-92
L3
tthe
three ways to cross Interstate 87 in the Town of Queensbury are we asking too much
of this two lane structure?
Page 27 The fourth sentence under item I. Traffic Impacts on Local Collector Roads
states: Tourists will not use local collector roads to access the park because they will not
know about them and the local collector roads would generally not provide direct and
easy access to their destinations when they leave the park This statement begs the
question.......... What are the destinations of people leaving the park ? .. IT GOES ON
TO SAY The increased traffic on local collector roads such as Glen Lake Road, West
Mountain Road, Round Pond Road and Sweet Road will be negligible. Local mobility,
except for the Route 9 corridor, will not be affected by the Great Escape expansion. The
capabilities of the local collector roads are adequate to accommodate the vehicular
demands of local circulation. The last sentence states: As a result there will be no impact
on the local collector roads in the area. I would ask, isn't Gurney Lane a local collector
road?
1.) How did the preparers of this document determine that people using the park don't
know about local collector roads? I would assume that the Park encourages and
experiences repeat customers. Where are the 2300 Great Escape employees going to go
when not at work? Will they all stay on site throughout the season?
2.) How did the applicant determine that the increase in traffic on collectors roads would
be negligible? This in light of the statement page 75 under conclusions, second to last
sentence that states " the trip generation during the afternoon peak hour of adjacent street
'
traffic is less than the morning peak hour trips and therefore, was not analyzed at all
study locations. " Here again lies much ambiguity, I have to believe that people who go
'
to work also return home. Who determined what locations would be studied and which
would be ignored? Isn't it reasonable to assume that morning commuters familiar with
the traffic snarls created by the morning arrivals to Great Escape ; commuters who did
not use the collector roads on the way to work might indeed use them on their way home?
3-93
' Apparently the study did not include this use of collector roads by local residents. Again
are we to believe that Gurney Lane will not experience greater numbers of cars as a direct
' result of the proposed expansion? How is safe pedestrian and bicycle traffic across the
bridge going to be insured?
3.) Given that: The U.S. Census predicted a 22% growth in population for Queensbury
for the 10 year period from 1990 —2000 . Given that through June of this year building
permits are on a record pace. Given that Towns use a conservative 2% rate of traffic
increase per year as a standard. Given that Warren and Washington Counties showed the
lowest rates of unemployment in the entire state. Given all this and more, how can the
applicant state that. "The capabilities of local collector roads are adequate to
Iaccommodate
the vehicular demands of local circulation?" I would pose this question to
this board: are you taking home more paper work now than you did last year or the year
before that? Do you believe that the collector roads will be able to handle traffic
adequately if growth stays at its current pace?
4.) Where in this report is there any kind of detailed study of the local traffic on
collector roads other than counts. Have large senior housing facilities and multiple
dwelling projects currently underway east of the Great Escape been accounted for with
regard to their access to interstate 87 and the Route 9 corridor; and what about pending
developments that are likely to receive approval? Has the applicant addressed the real
growth rate of the area and the associated traffic implications?
In that the applicant has suggested building an on site sewage treatment plant or
hooking up to a line provided by the Town, I would pose these questions.
Has sewering an area ever hurt or lessened the development of an area?
Has sewering ever caused population to decrease?
Has sewering an area ever hurt business startups or discouraged upgrades and expansion
of existing businesses?
In reality wouldn't sewering any area of the Town promote development and its
associated traffic? Where has the applicant addressed these scenarios?
1
3-94
5
5.) Although the pedestrian walk way will provide a safer and more convenient way to
enter the park, how will the effect of allowing Route 9 north bound traffic to more
quickly reach the troublesome bottle neck at the 9N / Glen Lake Road intersection and
the Gurney Lane Route 9 ,Intersection; how will this be addressed? Will traffic be
stacked between the Glen Lake Road light, Gurney Lane light and exit 20 light to the
point where west bound travelers of Glen Lake Road will be unable to turn right
regardless of a green light.
6.) Why was the nameless road that currently circumnavigates the Warren county
Municipal Center not recognized as a legitimate legal means used by many locals, to
avoid the traffic of exiting patrons of The Great Escape? As one of the four legs that
make up the Gurney Lane / 9N intersection and also the headquarters for the Warren
County Sheriffs office, shouldn't at least some consideration be given to this used and
viable route? How will Warren County officials feel about increased use of this 15 mile
per hour road? Will everything that is being proposed by the applicant create situations
where emergency vehicles may not be able to respond in a timely and necessary way?
7.) Will improvements to the 149 corridor lessen or cause greater numbers of cars and
trucks to enter the study area and well known bottle neck at exit and entrance ramps that
make up the entire Exit 20 interchanges?
The applicants abbreviated solutions to all the traffic problems in the study area boils
down to mostly on site changes and does not address adequately the negative impacts that
locals who must travel the roads in and around the Great Escape will experience. Simply
adding an additional turning lane into the park and optimizing lights is not going to
3-95
I6
produce any long term or short term solution to the massive growth this area of our town
is experiencing. The infrastructure simple does not exist and I see nothing in this draft
document that comes close to addressing the changes that would have to take place.
' In closing, I would like to say that the proposed new lane from northbound I — 87
' through the Route 9/ Gurney Lane intersection has a high probability of creating a worse
situation than already exists. It will reduce the stacking capabilities of the Gurney Lane
Bridge, create another lane change for big rigs and automobiles heading south on Route
9 from 149 and attempting to use the bridge for points south on Interstate 87, and require
' more time for all vehicles that either turn from or to the bridge from Route 9, thereby
increasing the likelihood that cars entering on yellow and God forbid red lights may in
Ifact be trapped and thus impede the flow of cars that now have a green light.
I
1
I
I
1 3-96
I
1
I
Written Response: (dgeis09a) P. . 1 of Z
To: The Town of Queensbury, NY g
Re:The Great Escape Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement "DGEIS")
Presented 8/29/00; By: Steven L. Johnson, Queensbury and Glens Falls, NY
(792-3927) September 5, 2000
The Draft Environmental Impact statement (DGEIS) for the Great Escape Theme Park
directly addressed improved visitor accommodation. Their FACT SHEET dated August
29, 2000 mentions several project impacts repeated here. Public review of this DGEIS
8/29/00 revealed a similar yet somewhat longer list. This statement responds.
Proposed mitigation includes paving, internal
roads, landscaping.
RESIDENT OMMFNT
Existing public roadway Mitigation
design provides only for smaller
traffic volumes than Great
Escape predicts. As well residents
express concern that local geography
' modification within the Park could promote hydrocarbon laden run off from paved areas
within the park into Glen Lake watershed. With those additions proposed by the Park,
traffic within the Park will likely flow easily while traffic entering or exiting on public
roadways will likely be slowed because existing roads were designed for, and previously
carried, only easily accommotated local traffic.
Direct access from I87 would reduce local income, yet increase local traffic safety. Have
these factors been compared?
' WATER QUALITY
"Mitigation Proposed as a tertiary sewage Park plans seem to effectively mitigate
' treatment plant will meet the State's most mitigate potential problems associated
stringent standards." with sewage treatment. Additionally,
the Glen Lake fen, or natural wetlands
surrounding the Park and upland from Glen
Lake, provides an historically effective natural Stabilization Basin. This approximately
10 million square foot basin between the Park and Glen Lake extends across Route 9 and
Interstate 87 to include over 4 million more square feet. Discharging treated waste as far
as possible from the great Escape and Glen Lake would seemingly ensure that water
entering Glen Lake becomes, first pathogen free and sterile through Great Escape's
' proposed excellent treatment facility, and then reconstituted while percolating through up
to 14 million square feet of wetland before entering Glen Lake.
' I heard little mention of tie in to existing municipal sewer systems. Could this be done
with flow meters to assess proportional costs?
' VISUAL IMPACTS
DGEIS Executive Summary states Rides with elevations above existing hills
no significant visual impact. appear to allow clear sight of those rides
from most of Glen Lake surface and those
shoreline sections directly across the lake.
Were sight line contour maps prepared? RECEIVED
SEP 0 6 20061;
3-97
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
DI AAIAIIAI� ACCIPC
Written Response: -
(dgeis09a) Pg. 2 of
To: The Town of Queensbury, NY
' Re:The Great Escape Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement "DGEIS")
Presented 8/29/00; By: Steven L. Johnson, Queensbury and Glens Falls, NY
(792-3927) September 5, 2000
Sued GREAT ESCAPE Impact RESIDENT COIVIMRNT
NOISE
' Great Escape states, "no significant The wording here, "no significant audible
audible noise." noise" suggests some audible sound.
Determining whether this sound is noise, or
' significant noise requires concerted opinion
from those who hear those sounds.
Evaluating "audible noise" level significance involves many factors. Measuring noise
' levels at times and locations identified by the public and then ensuring that sound levels
never rise above those measured levels would seem one method of cooperative
agreement.
' What methods determine community judgments about "audibility",
noise", and the modifying term "significant"?
ECONOMIC (Current Property Valuations)
PARK GLEN LAKE
$17.2 Million $45 Million
Revisions to the Park will created an The difference in current valuations
$8.5 million valuation increase. between the Park and Glen Lake
property will remain preponderently
' weighted toward Glen Lake property
owners.
Additional rides add greatly to Traffic, Noise, Visual Impacts, and increased attendance
creates more Waste Water for disposal. Because the Park activity creates these Public
needs, both within and outside the Private Park, how much cost should the Public bear?
H
CONSISTENT THREADS
Phrases such as: "conform to existing", "function
at the same or unproved levels", "levels will
remain consistent", "meets .... standards"
are frequently made on the Great Escape Fact Sheet
distributed at the 8/29/00 Public Meeting.
FROM RESIDENTS
These qualitative statements require
explicit unbiased measures of:
1. Local traffic; travel speed, travel
convenience, and travel safety.
2. Water quality entering Glen Lake
at its upstream inlet.
3. Resident opinion about Park
visibility and or visibility changes.
4. Sounds and/or ratings of sounds
eminating from the Park by people
within ranges of audibility.
These measures, taken at intervals, appear to allow "potentially problem" identification
within enough time that the Park can begin effective corrective action. What corrective
actions for potential problems, to visitors, employees, local residents, and environs are
planned by the Park?
3-98
To The Planning Board:
We have been residents of Twicwood for 27 years. Twicwood is a neighborhood of
81 homes, all of which pay dearly in taxes. For most of those years, this was an oasis in the
middle of chaos. When you came up the Twicwood hill, you were in another world, one of
beauty and quiet. We have maintained our homes and enjoyed living here.
The change started creeping in several years ago, none of which we created.
Expansion didn't just mean bigger and more buildings, it meant level the land, cut down the
trees! Business must expand and improve, but not at this price. We in Twicwood are
affected, but so is the community as a whole!! When the landscape of trees and mountains,
that depict the Adirondacks are lost, what do we have? Another anywhere USA? With the
removal of the trees and buffers, noise became an issue.
The Great Escape was never a noise issue, until it was taken over by the newest
owners. Before the roller coaster was installed, studies were made to be sure it would not
intrude on its neighbors. The original setting was moved, and it has NEVER been a
problem! But 2 years ago, without any fanfare, The Alpine Bobsled was put it. This has
been a nightmare for not only those of us in Twicwood, but surrounding areas as well. Our
Good Neighbor has disappeared!
Sound studies portrayed in the DGEIS are flawed! The methods, the timing, the
conclusions are all wrong. The main source of the noise, the bobsled, was not running.
This Bobsled gives out a rumble that is constant and rhythmic. The continuous repetition of
that bobsled noise is worse than a dripping faucet. A drip doesn't make much noise, but it
can make you crazy after hours and hours. Believe me, this is a nuisance and annoyance to
many, not just in Twicwood. Let's be fair. Use meaningful data — not just what you want
to show. While the Bobsled is an issue now, the future may bring many more problems
with similar rides. We want them solved before they became part of the park. Another
problem with the Great Escape has been concerts. Again, our good neighbor has subjected
us to loud music (?) at nighttime hours. What are the rules concerning concerts? Concerts
were never a part of the previous Great Escape! Queensbury citizens need protection from
all kinds of noise and destruction of the land. We have found that after a ride is in place, an
event is underway, or trees removed it is too late to do anything.
Why focus only on sound levels? What about nuisances? Why doesn't Queensbury
use the wisdom of Glens Falls and establish nuisance laws to eliminate nuisance noises
from Great Escape. Does the impact statement address low level, rhythmic nuisance
noises?
I
CC: Town Board
RECEIVED Erwin and Virginia Funk
A U G 2 9 200K! 17 Twicwood Lane
TOWN N NG OFFICE
PLANNING OFFICE
3-99
H
P
11
I
J
H
Comments on The Great Escapds
Draft Generic Environmental Impact
Statement,
This DGEIS contains much data that needs to be carefully reviewed. This review needs to be
done allowing for more comments, both verbally and in writing. The comment time needs to be extended six
months. To not do this would be a disservice to our community and to the area as a whole. We are adjacent to
the Lake George watershed and the Adirondack Park; we are at the foothills of the Adirondacks and need to
carefully review what is being proposed and act accordingly. We need to plan something that we can be proud
of, not just for the present but for future generations.
* Were noise barriers ever considered - if not why not? These could be attractive and very effective.
There is, as addressed in 4.82 on page 4-21, discussion of increased noise propagation which might
possibly arise from changes in topography from clearing and grading activities for the new Project
construction and instillation of new and particularly noisy rides like the Alpine Bobsled, with a
potential for off -site audible noise impacts. Does this mean that the Bobsled stays, as is?
* Page 4-21 states that the hill within the US Route 9 corridor, which protects the receptor
neighborhoods from major noise will not be eliminated. The cross sectional illustrations of Figure 4 -
10, 4 -11 and 4 -12 show removal of land and trees to these areas. "Any changes in landscaping for
the Project, such as the landscaping of the parking lots along the corridor will have no effect on noise
propagation from the Northway. Has this been substantiated? Please provide the data. These
changes occur in the Samoset Motel area and in the Animal Land/Martha's Motel area The
document further states that vegetation must be 20-100 feet wide with shrub growth and a height of
15 feet or more to be effective for 2-6 dB of sound change. How will removing land and trees,
replacing them with plantings, landscaped clusters and black top accomplish this? On page 2-10 the
document further states that a variety of plantings will be used, and that the parking lot will not be the
typical layout, but a festival style. This festival style would have to be approved; yet the document
considers it a fact and proceeds to describe "plantings".
* The document states "There will not be significant long-term or cumulative audible noise impacts
from the Project on the neighborhoods" studied for the DGEIS. The document goes on to say there is
no causal relationship between growth in visitor attendance, the corresponding level of general Park
operations and no increase in audible noise impacts in the neighborhoods. The Park has committed to
mitigate baseline cumulative impacts by retrofitting noise abatement measures on the Bobsled ride as
stated in 4.8.2. This has not been accomplished The Bobsled is still very loud, as the park
management is well aware. As mentioned above, the Bobsled provides off -site audible noise impact.
I also question the statement that there is no causal relationship between growth in visitor attendance
and the increase in audible noise. I ask the board and anyone here present to tell me that there is no
increase in audible noise if you have even two or three more people in your yard or house, especially
if these people are doing such activities as one does in an amusement park.
* The document says that the purpose and need, for expansion, is to allow the park to build needed
infrastructure and support facilities to improve its customer access and generally to accommodate
growth in attendance over a period of several years from its current levels. The proposed Project will
1 3-100
Iv -
August 29, 2000
' "strengthen the local tourist ind
ustry dustry ". The benefits will grow and expand the area visitors. (See
page il of executive study). Have these additional issues been discussed, such as how will the
' additional traffic move. Please provide plans for handling the traffic that will leave the park and not
go onto the Northway. Will it go into neighborhoods and cause congestion and noise? Please
provide plans that address the traffic, noise, wastewater and environmental factors that this additional
t traffic will cause on the secondary roads. There is a lot of growth in the Town of Queensbury with an
increase in housing planned for the Highland area. This traffic will also be utilizing the same
secondary roads that come from Route 9, where is this discussed as a potential issue and how has it
been addressed? Noise and environmental level calculations should include these projected increases
' in population growth and traffic, when projecting the increase anticipated by the park.
* The document states that no continuous noise from the park was discernable during the monitoring
' periods. It goes on to say intrusive noise at the Twicwood site was primarily due to vehicular traffic
on Greenwood Lane. Other noises were from children, aircraft, and a mail truck. During the entirety
of both monitoring sessions, no intrusive noises were heard coming from the direction of the park
except for a very faint bang. This was quoted from 4.0 Monitoring results and Observations 4.1.1.
' The document also goes on to say on page 4-21 that there will not be significant long-term or
cumulative " audible noise" affects.
I would just like to point out to the Planning Board some interesting information on the effects
'
of noise on health and well being. The following is quoted from EFFECTS OF NOISE ON
HEALTH AND WELL-BEING, taken from a,"zv.consciouschoice.com/note/notel206.htmL-
'Because noise often does not produce visible effects, and because there is usually not a distinct
'
cause -and effect relationship between a single noise event and a clear adverse health effect, some
people believe noise does not pose a serious risk to human health. But evidence from a number of
recent studies, especially on children, provides ample proof that noise harms human health and
decreases quality of life. While noise usually will not kill us, it can certainly make our lives
'
miserable.
* On page 4-23 the document states that the 1990 sound levels at the monitoring sites have remained
'
unchanged over the past 10 years, despite increased attendance and the addition of rides and
attractions. Table 3-9 states there are an increase of 8.2 dB in Courthouse Estates and 5.7 dB in
Twicwood.
Six Flags is proud of their "scream machines" and if you go to their web site, n-w-w.sixf1ags.com
you can find the sites in the United States and world wide. Their advertisements really emphasize the new
scream rides, describing them in detail including their height.
'
The issues I have addressed are just a few of the contradictions that need review and we need to
take this opportunity to make our area a place of which we can be proud. I have attached the names and
addresses of the Six Flags sites in the United States. I strongly suggest that Planning Staff or members of the
Planning Board enquire of these towns/cities regarding the compliance with the areas that are being addressed
tonight, such as environment, noise, water quality, and traffic by Six Flags. Another question to pose of these
people is - where these parks are located in relation to neighborhoods, wet lands, scenic views or other areas of
'
concern.
Karen C. Angleson
I Greenwood Lane
Queensbury, NY 12804
(518-792-8553)
'
kangleson@mybizz.net
3-101
i2 Coff�LAT
C
I
Six Flags America
P.O. Box 4210
Largo, MD 20775
PH: 301-249-1500
Six Flags Astroworid & Waterworld
9001 Kirby Drive
Houston, TX 77054
PH: 713-799-8404
Six Flags Darien Lake
9993 Allegheny Road
Darien Center, NY 14040
PH: 716-599-4641
Six Flags Elitch Gardens
299 Walnut
Denver, CO 80204
PH: 303-595-4386
Six Flags Fiesta Texas
17000 IH-10 West
San Antonio, TX 78257
PH: 210-697-5050
Six Flags Great Adventure,
Hurricane Harbor & Wild Safari
Route 537
Jackson, NJ 08527
PH: 732-928-1821
Six Flags Great America
542 N Route 21
Gurnee, IL 60031
PH: 847-249-4636
Six Flags KentuckyKingdom
9
937 Phillips Lane
'
Louisville, KY 40209
PH: 502-366-2231
' Six Flags Marine World
2001 Marine World Parkway
tVallejo, CA 94589
I I of3 8/29/00 1:48 PM
3-102
PH: /U/-b4J-b/l1
Six Flags Magic Mountain & Hurricane Harbor
26101 Magic Mountain Pkwy
Valencia, CA 93155
' PH: 661-255-4100
From the Los Angeles area, call (818)367-5965
t Six Flags New England
1623 Main Street
Agawam, MA 01001
i PH: 413-786-9300
Six Flags Ohio
1060 N. Aurora Road
Aurora, OH 44202
' PH: 330-562-7131
Six Flags Over Georgia
7561 Six Flags Parkway
Austell, GA 30168
PH: 770-948-9290
'
Six Flags Over Texas
2201 Road to Six Flags
'
Arlington, TX 76010
PH: 817-640-8900
Six Flags St. Louis
I-44 & Allenton/Six Flags Rd
Eureka, MO 63025
PH: 314-938-4800
'
Frontier City
11501 NE Expressway
Oklahoma City, OK 73131
'
PH: 405-478-2412
_
Great Escape
'
Route 9 Box 511
Lake George, NY 12845
PH: 518-792-3500
Hurricane Harbor
1800 E Lamar Blvd.
Arlington, TX 76006
PH: 817-265-3356
' 2 of3 829=1:48 PM
3-103
splasntown
21300 iH-45 North
'
Spring, TX 77373
PH: 281-355-3300
Waterworld USA Concord
1950 Waterworld Parkway
Concord, CA 94520
`
PH: 925-609-1364
Waterworld USA Sacramento
1600 Exposition Blvd.
Sacramento, CA 95815
PH: 916-924-3747
White Water
'
250 N. Cobb Pkwy
Marietta, GA 30062
PH:770-424-6683
White Water Bay
3908 W Reno
'
Oklahoma City, OK 73107
PH: 405-943-9687 or 405-478-2412
'
Wyandot Lake
10101 Riverside Drive
Powell, OH 43065
PH: 614-889-9283
3 of 3
8/79/001.48 Plv
3-104
n
® nrnct�/C�'1
® _ AUG 3 1 2000
August 30, 2000 TOWN OF QUEENS13
Dear Mr. Rounds: PLANNING OFFICE
I was unable to attend the meeting regarding the Great Escape on August 29, so am writing my
comments to you.
I'm a 30 year resident of Queensbury and I live on Glen Lake. I've raised three children here who
attended the Lake George schools. It's been a great place to live and raise children. Over the
years we've made many trips to Storytown/Great Escape. When Charlie Woods owned and ran
the park it was fun, clean and a great place to go.
One of my daughters, her husband and two of my grandchildren visited me in August of 1999,
from Washington state. As a treat I took all of us to the Great Escape. What a disappointment! The
price was very high, but I expected that. However I never expected to see the disrepair and
neglect that has taken place since Mr. Woods owned the park.
First the grounds were unkept with weeds growing everywhere
We went to Jungle Land and as soon as we walked in you could smell sewage. The waters were
murcky with papers, bottles and trash thrown in them. We walked out of there, fast
I was sitting on the deck by the loppty-loop (can't think of the name) that's located in the front of
the park, waiting for the younger generation to ride. The deck is behind several eating places and
the Western Theater. The garbage stench coming fro m the restaurants was horrible.
We took a ride on the water ride in the Western Town. Waiting in line we could see trash thrown
behind buildings, including a wire market cart.
We took a ride on the overhead ride that goes over the park. Paint was peeling from the
structure, the sign noting how many people were allowed in cars was missing its number (three
of us rode, two adults and one child) and if t remember only two are allowed.
On the river run in the big tubes, people were barefoot, I thought that wasn"t allowed.
The beautiful International Village that Mr. Wood had was full of cheap stuffed animals. So tackey!
I could go on but that's an example of a place that I won't go back to and certainly won't
recommend anyone else to go there.
In closing I feel if Six Flags can't care for their park, how are they going to care about the
environment or people who live in the area!
This location is not the place for Six Flags, and I feel an expansion would be devasting. They
have already ruined a clean and beautiful park.
Donna M. Harubin
11 Nacy Drive
Lake George, NY 12845
(518) 793-6515
3-105
1
'
Great Escape Expansion
I have just returned from the Queensbury Town Planning Board Meeting at Queensbury High on
Tuesday the 29th of August. Over forty speakers discussed the various issues and concerns over the
proposed Great Escape expansion. Water quality, noise, traffic, sightlines and septic were the major topic
of discussion. The majority of speakers were opposed to expansion with a small number of local
'
businesses and charities there to point out the many good deeds of the Great Escape.
I had a chance to speak and wanted to clarify a few topics. The Great Escape is part of a national
corporation Six Flags of America. According to the attorney for Great Escape, the park will spend
approximately 30 million dollars including land purchases sewage plant and other infrastructure. A
future service road and hotel. This is big business at work. Millions spent and millions more in the
future. The land purchase was and is a speculative purchase with no guarantee of approval from the town
planning board. If all the plans go through, the park estimates approximately 600,000 additional visitors.
That figure times the entry fee? Millions and millions of dollars. Again big business at work. A publicly
held company is concerned with one issue, Profits. The Great Escape has proven to be a good neighbor,
t
strong charity work, and good for the economy. That is what entertainment businesses do, try to build a
great community presence to reach the bottom line, profits. They have hired planners, and environmental
firms and lawyers and p.r. firms to "educate" the public and planning board on the many positives the
expansion will create. It is so important to remember what the bottom line is for the Escape... to service
that debt and set the stage for future profits for years to come. Again that is the goal US. Is making a
profit a bad thing? Certainly not, but at what price? Great Escape attorneys also told me the lack of
expansion could seriously affect the viability of the park. I have seen this ploy with professional sports
'
franchises, give us what we want or we may move. It works every time, tax breaks for the team to stay, a
new stadium, anything so cities don't lose that revenue.
I hope the citizens and planning board of Queensbury do not get mired in impact studies
concerning noise, traffic, water quality and the like, that is not the issue here. It is MONEY. Big .
corporate money. And Six Flags has the millions and the persistence to see this thing through till they
have there Hotel and Restaurants and extra rides with capacity to hold those 600,000 fine paying
customers. The employees and people representing the corporation are just like you and 1, good people,
good neighbors and may even believe that growth at any cost (30 million on the parks part and untold
damage to the environment and standard of living for the rest of us) is good for our economy, but we have
1
to ask at what cost. The parks attendance is better than it has ever been. It is going nowhere. It is a
negotiating tactic to throw a lot of proposals at your adversary and see what sticks. Maybe not all will go
through, but if we throw enough we are going to get our ultimate goal.
The planning board is the only protection we all have. Please, for the sake of our future children
realize the approximately 18 to 22 million dollars that will be gained through tickets, merchandise, food
and lodging will be reflected in stock prices. It comes with an awfully steep price tag.
Kevin Dineen Queensbury 8/30/00
RECEIVED
t SEP 0 6 ZOOG----, -
TOWN OF QUEENSAy
PLANNING OFFICE
1 3-106
I RECEIVED
SEP 0 5 2000�� August 30,
' TOWN OF QUEENSBURY '1003
Chairman, Planning Board, PLANNING OFFICE
Pach time I have attended meetings of the Planning
Board when the Great Escape is on the agenda, I hear the
' same people complain, they hash their gripes over and
over, and generally aren't interested in the opinions
of others.
At the meeting of August 29, 2000, probably no one
from North or South Queensbury were there. I live in
West Glens Falls., and although none of us in these areas
of town are directly impacted by Great Escape, we enjoy
all the benefits, ie: employment opportunities, spending
at local businesses by park visitors, the school taxes,
the sales tax revenues, etc. We have all the advantages
and none of the hassle.
' The people in the areas sittrounding the Park have
some legitimate concerns that need to be addressed, but
the history of business on the Route 9 corridor is that
of amusements, lodging, and retail services, which thankfully
are growing.
I would point out that for every house built in the
three neighborhoods, many trees were removed and not that
many were replanted. On the corner of Route 9 and Round
Pond Road a very large lot was clear-cut and the businesses
who located there did not replant very many trees, so not
all the noise problems they experience are the fault of
Great Escape.
My impression of the homeowners in those neighbor-
hoods is that nothing short of Great Escape closing their
business for good, (rather than for 62 months) will
satisfy them, ever.
I say that there are more of us than them, and we
say, Go -For -It -Great Escape, do the best you can to
excite your visitors, pour more money into our area and
we hope you will gain world-wide recognition!
Truthfully, I'm afraid they are beginning to think
they've bought a pig -in -a -poke and will shut down the Park
and go do business where they are made welcome.
Sincerely yours,
Carol E. Eppich
480 Corinth Rd.
Queensbury, NY. 12804
792-0762
J
1 3-107
E. PETER MARSHALL
I
1
E. Peter Marshall, CPA
Peter R. Marshall
Christine A. Marshall
Kimberly A. Deuel
Rita L. Marshall
Certified Public Accountant
MARSHALL ASSOCIATES
RESIDENCE 6 WHIPPOORWILL
QUEENSBURY, NY
P.O. Box 145,243 Ridge Street
Glens Falls, New York 12801
(518)792-1162
Fax 792-1104
P.O. Box 55
Lake George, New York 12845
August 30, 2000
RE:Great Escape Growth &
Expansion Plans
Chris Round, Director of Economic RECEIVED
Development & Zoning Administrator
Queensbury Town Office Building SEP U 1 l,;Uj
Bay Road 6
Queensbury, NY 12804 TOWN OFQUEENSBURY
Dear Chris Round: PLANNING OFFICE
The purpose of this letter, after the public meeting August 29, is to
express my personal feeling and opinion as to the Great Escape'.s plans
and operation here in Queensbury, Warren County.
I am a strong supporter of this operation and thankful they are here
willing to expand and invest millions of dollars in our local economy.
Having lived here, over fifty years, most of my life I have experi-
enced seeing and being involved with many businesses that have come &
gone in our community for many reasons. We are living in somewhat a
depressed geographical region and recent newspapers articles confirm
this; just last week our per -capital income was reported on being with
the lowest of the national compilation of per capital income.
The Great Escape is willing to invest in real estate that will increase
real estate tax revenue, payrolls that will be higher and probably for
a longer season spread, increased sales tax revenue, nontoxic land
uses, services that cost the public little or nothing & I am sure many
other benefits that we the Town & County residents will benefit from
(more business for other businesses, etc.). This is also(their expansion
& building activity) complimentary to the Village and Town of Lake
George's "Exhibition Building" plans. We should work in unison with our
neighbors for economic and other mutual growth & development.
As for our residential neighborhoods, we need growth in our Town &
County to help ease the tax burdens of providing first class municipal
services and educational needs. The neighborhoods will see their homes
increase in resale market value; my in-laws built two homes in Twicwood
and were easily able to sell each at a profit.
I do believe the GE should work close with the Town & its neighbors
and think they appear to be doing so. I also favor a main sewer line
for businesses on Route 9 pass the Municipal Center to Route 149.
I do not think that the GE should build their own sewer/waste treatment
plant. Hopefully, GE and the Town will not be discouraged by those
' who express opposition. However, those are usually the only ones
you hear from. Sincerely,G�
' MEMBER: AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACr'^1 itiTeNTc _ Ncw v()RK STATE SOCIETY OF CE TIRED PUBLIC ACCOUNTAN
3-108
11
1
r
- ADIRONDACK'�
--- - ALt1tED E. KRIsrENSEv, M.D., RA.C.S.
ORTHOPEDIC DOUGLAS M. PETROSKI, M.D.
CAROLPHYSICIANS & SURGEONS OBERT S. SELLIFiSHE,M.D
RDBERT G. SEu.IG, M.D.
68 QUAKER ROAD • QUEENSBURY, NEW YORK 12804 • PHONE: (518) 793-5601 • FAx: (518) 793-5916
August 31, 2000
Town of Queensbury Planning Board
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
Re: Great Escape
Dear Members of the Board,
RECEIVED
SEP 0 5 ZOjlB�v
TOWN OF QUEENSBU�RRYY
PLANNING OFFICE
Several issues are of concern to me referable to the expansion
plan of the Great Escape as described in their environmental impact
statement. In my opinion, the sound analysis was flawed and skewed
in the favor of the developers. It was my understanding the
Bobsled was not running and at other occasions the park was closed
When these measurements were taken. I can hear the Bobsled, roller
coasters and the amplified and unamplified voices of persons in the
park from my residence on Fitzgerald Road which is one and one-half
miles away.
The report did not mention proposed hours of operation. The
sounds emanating from the park have been a greater source of
disturbance to me, to my family and my neighbors since the hours of
operation have been increased. I am concerned about the removal of
hillsides and trees by the Samoset and also by the fo-mer zoo which
in my opinion will increase sound transmission from the park and
from the northway. No study of this issue was mentioned.
The report did not address festival parking. I would disagree
with the conclusion that traffic on local collector roads will be
increased negligibly as they report. If the park guests do not use
these roads, certainly the 2300 proposed employees will use them to
commute to and from their jobs. These roads which I travel on a
daily basis are already quite congested during hours of park
operation.
I have concerns about the detrimental effects on the Glen Lake
water shed as the result of constructing a large sewer treatment
facility near the Glen Lake fen. I am concerned that 90 percent of
3-109
' TOWN OF QUE"SBURY
PLANNING BOARD
August 31, 2000
L Glen Lake residents will see a 200 foot tall roller coaster from
their highly taxed lake front residences. 100 percent of Glen Lake
residents and visitors will view this tower while boating. I feel
t these changes should not be allowed. Lake front residents already
pay a higher property tax than they would for a comparable
residence not located on a lake front. The tax structure would
have to be amended if these changes were allowed to fairly reflect.
' the diminution in all of our property values.
I Peal there i s a great deal of public opinion which is
clearly against this project. I do not feel that the environmental
impact statement instills confidence that citizen's concerns are
being addressed.
DMP:mly
1
1
Respectfully,
Douglas M. Petroski, M.D.
49 Fitzgerald Road,
Queensbury, NY 12801
1 3-110
RECEIVED
I
H
August 31, 2000
Queensbury Town Planning Board
c/o Darlene Dougher
Queensbury Town Hall
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY IW4
Re. Great Escape DGEIS
Dear Planning Board Representatives;
SEP 0 1 20
TOWN OF QUEEN RY
PLANNING OFFICE
I am writing this to you to comment on the 600 Page Great Escape Environmental Review. For the Great
Escape to state that their proposed increase in attendance and development will have negligible impact on
the surround environment is absurd.
As a full time resident of Western NY last winter my husband and I bought a single family "camp" style
home on the north side of Glen Lake to use for vacationing. Imagine our shock to come up this summer and
hear the noise of thunder from the Alpine Bobsled ride when we imagined we'd be hearing the sound of
waves. Knowing that my home and many homes are dependent upon lake water for household uses (with
no sewers or town water available!) I was shocked to hear from year round residents that the Great Escape
was proposing to expand attendance and buildings in the area that makes up the Glen Lake watershed.
Since my area has very few smaller lakes is inconceivable to me in this day in age that a town the size of
Queensbury would not have invested in the infrastructure and zoning ordinances to protect a beautiful lake
such as Glen Lake. y
Coming from Western NY I can state that my family and most other visitors come to the Glens Falls Lake
George region to enjoy the natural beauty of the area. My family enjoyed our visits so much that we
purchased a home on Glen Lake to enjoy. Upon reading the summary sheet presented by the Great Escape I
can assure you that their claim that their increase in attendance and buildings will have a negligible impact
on the surrounding area and lake is simply false. How do I know this? I know this because I am familiar
' with the expansions they have had at Six Flags Darien Lake in western NY. I can look at their 200 foot
roller coaster which can be seen and heard for miles which sticks out like a sore thumb on the surrounding
landscape. The view from the top of the coaster must go out at least 50 miles in all directions - I kid you
' not. Do you want the noise and visual pollution caused by this ride for a densely packed residential town
like Queensbury?
Furthermore, I can view Darien Lake's algae covered runoff ponds and weedy lake stre%,6m with park
garbage and see the impact of Darien's expansion. Likewise with the lines of car and buses spewing
exhaust waiting to enter the park to pay their $7 parking fee. The locals think the passes are affordable?
Trust -me - they won't think so when it.cost em $7 bucks every time they stop in. Think of all the traffic and
' accidents that are going to result on Rt. 9 by the additional traffic generated by people picking up and
dropping off kids to avoid the parking fee. And Rt. 9 is in no way similar to the sparsely populated major
state road that runs by Darien Lake in sparsely populated farmland at least an hour from urban centers. And
' don't forget the mammoth hotel that makes the park "a resort" plunked right down on the edge of poor
Darien Lake hastening its demise. And now Six Flags is pursuing the same strategy for Glen Lake by
paving and building 200 room hotels in its watershed. And oh yes - building its own private (prone to
' failure) water treatment system right on the edge of the Glen Lake wetlands. Excuse me - I may be naive -
but isn't the town supposed to be supplying access to these services for the good of the entire community
and to ensure the plant is run correctly and within code?
H
' Simply put - as an outsider I can tell you that the overly ambitious plans of the Great Escape on the limited
real estate it has available will destroy Glen Lake, surrounding neighborhoods and ultimately the quality of
like in the residential community of Queensbury. Six Flags appears to be pursuing a one size fits all park
strategy and the "improvements" they have installed at Darien Lake simply will not fit at the Great Escape.
I'm guessing that Six Flags Darien Lake (between camping, the park and the resort) is at least 10 times the
size of usable Great Escape lands.
Again, as a new Glen Lake homeowner it is inconceivable that so little has been done in Queensbury to
protect the Glen Lake watershed. Western NY would love to have a Glen Lake to protect! I urge you to
reject the above proposed expansions as inappropriate for the beautiful area that is (was) Queensbury. The
Northeast already has too many Six Flags Darien Lakes and Six Flags New Jerseys - that's why us out of
towners come up to Lake George. I urge you not to throw away beautiful Glen Lake to a profit hungry out
of town corporation which will do anything and everything to enhance its bottom line.
I
Sincerely,
Patricia A. Davison
1
1 3-112
C-s£ R((1
The Cha=en Companies
1
MEMORANDUM
i
To: Chris Round
From: Stuart Mesinger
Date: September 1, 2000
iRe: Great Escape Comment Period Extension
Job #: 99907.00
The purpose of this memo is to present my thoughts with respect to extension -of the
Great Escape comment period.
:First, let me emphasize that from the point of view of our work, there is no need to
!extend the comment period. We have been engaged by the Town to provide an
unbiased technical review of the GEIS, and we plan to complete our comments by
the 12th.
Certainly it is not unheard of to extend comment periods, particularly where there
is great interest in a project and numerous requests to make such extension. I'd say
that what we heard the other night falls within the realm of conditions under which
!I've seen other comment periods extended. Where comment periods are extended,
' such extensions rarely exceed 30 days. If such an extension were granted in this
case, a total comment period of 2 % months will have been provided, which in my
judgment is more than adequate time to review this impact statement.
r
!
3-113
:1WINDOWSUEMP\Completeness extension memo.doc
September 4, 2000
RECEIVED
1
Queensbury Planning Board:
SEP 0 6 2000�
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
PLANNING OFFICE
I am submitting my comments for consideration in response to the proposed expansion of The Great Escape. A
600 page study should not be allowed to replace pure common sense and overshadow the reality of the
expansion would do to the Town of Queensbury.
Building new entrances and pedestrian bridges will not solve the problem of the influx of thousands of people to
the area. There will be more traffic on ALL of our area roads, more noise and pollution not to mention
additional strain on medical professionals called upon for medical emergencies created by more people in an
already crowded area. I have experienced all of this in other "amusement park towns". Do not let Queensbury
become another Orlando!
My family visited the Great Escape early in the season and it was a disappointment. The park has become
shabby looking and many of the rides were closed. I was glad we had discount tickets for I would -not pay the
full price to go there. If the owners of The Great Escape can't keep up what they have now, how will the run
' and even larger park??!! The Great Escape is becoming a large noisy eyesore and I truly sympathize with the
surrounding neighborhoods.
Queensbury is still a wonderful place to live and raise a family. Let's keep it that way and say NO to the Great
Escape expansion!
Sharon Mcpon
16 Heresford Lane
Queensbury, NY 12804
n
u
1
1 3-114
' CC . r�-L�F�IV
RECEIVED
'
September 5, 2000 SEP 0 6 200
9V
TOWN OF QUEdvSBURY
'
Town of Queensbury PLANNING OFF!CE
Supervisor's Office
'
I would like to comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement regarding the
expansion of The Great Escape Theme Park.
1. I am against a paved parking lot area anywhere near the watershed that feeds into Glen
Lake.
'
2. I am against a sewer treatment plant on site. Great Escape should be required to hook
g P P q
ifragile
up to the municipal sewer line. Run it up from Gambles. Glen Lake water quality is a
ecosystem that does not need any additional loading.
phosphate
3. A light should be placed at the entrance to Glen Lake road to make exit from that road
'
going south possible during the summer season.
4. Great Escape currently has a drain valve located on their flume ride that dumps
'
clorinated water down the hill into the Glen Lake watershed. Control is located on the side
of the holding pond in back of Ghost town. When holding pond is filled it sometimes
'
overflows down hill into watershed.
5. There is a dam at the end of Jungle land in the park where Great Escape controls the
level of water flowing past. Do they have the necessary permits from DEC for that.
Please do not allow Great Escape to expand beyond what is feasible. The ecosystem
'
in the Glen Lake watershed has declined in the last 35 years I have traveled in it. There is a
finite limit on how much they can expand on their piece of property. Please do not get
bullied by "big money' lawyers and consultants, do what is best for the people in your
town. Great Escape cares not about the community or the people,they are after the
dollars.
Mark Prendeville
Ash Dr.
Glen Lake
1 3-115
RECEIVED
I
n
n
P
H
Robert C. WeStCOtt, D.D.S.
84 Glenwood Avenue
Queensbury, New York 12804
Mr. Craig Mac Ewan, Chairman
Town of Queensbury Planning Office
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, N.Y. 12804
Dear Mr. MacEwan,
SEP 0 6 200W�")
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
PLANNING OFFICE
Office: (518) 793-3160
Res.: (518) 792-7163
September 5, 2000
I write in opposition to the proposed expansion of
The Great Escape. As a resident and property owner in Queens -
bury for the past 40 years, I believe that the expansion would
have a disasterous effect on the town.
I am a member of the Glens Falls Country Club and I
join my fellow citizens from Glen Lake, Twicwood and Court
House Estates in voicing their concerns on the impact of this
expansion on the environment, traffic and noise.
The proposed roller coaster, rising to a height of 200
f eetk would be one of the highest structures north of Albany.
It would be a constant disturbance to the Glens Falls Country
Club as it would be highly visible and audible as it rises
above the tree line.
I put the following questions to the Planning Board.
1. What is the elevation of the land at the site of the pro-
posed new roller coaster relative to the elevation of its neigh-
bors? It appears that it would be higher and, therefore, would
add additional height to the structure.
2. I would like to know how much of the structure would be visible
from the Country Club and other adjoining venues.
One way to be sure would be to launch a surveyors balloon
tethered to a 200 foot rope so that all concerned parties could
see for themselves what the visual impact would be. This tech-
nique has been used before in Queensbury.
3. Is there a site on The Great Excape campus that would conceal
the coaster from its neighbors?
4. Does the Board wish to "preserve the rural nature of the town"
as we have been told in the past?
I urge the Board to meet its responsibility in protecting
its citizens and neighborhoods from excessive intrusions from
outside agencies.
Sincerely yours,
/,gy-1
(� ,
ay��
Robert C. Westcott, D. .S.
3-116
September 6, 2000
Queensbury Planning Board
Queensbury Municipal Center
Bay Road
' Queensbury, NY 12804
1 Re: The Great Escape Expansion
Dear Planning Board Members:
' As more information becomes available about The Great Escape's."plan
the more I am convinced that this is an environmental disaster for
' Queensbury. Recognizing a positive economic impact I wish to
express my opposition to expansion. This is based on its
environmental impact, the noise pollution, the additional traffic
' congestion, and the ridiculous addition of a twenty story roller
coaster, which would certainly be widely visible and a detraction
from its environment.
' Sincerely yours,
tom`
' Kenneth C. Hopper, M.D.
1
1 3-117
' PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATES, P.C.
'
A Private Center for Counseling Michael P. Homenick, Ph.D. JoEllen A. Parsons, CSW
Director of Programs Martha C. M`Gee, CSW
James P. Merrigan, Ph.D. Clinical Social Workers
' Clinical Director
r
Licensed Psychologists
RECEIVED
SEP 0 8 20g8--,,
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
September 6, 2000 PLANNING OFFICE
t
Town Planning Board
' Town of Queensbury
Haviland Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
tRe: The Great Escape Expansion
' Dear Planning Board Members:
I am a resident of Queensbury and live on Seelye Road in Cleverdale. I also own an office
' building at 551 Bay Road. I strongly oppose the expansion of the Great Escape
Amusement Park.
' I oppose the current expansion plans, specifically because of their environmental impact on
the local ecology in the Great Escape area including:
(1) Glen Lake, both the residential community and concern about storm water runoff
' (2) The effect of noise pollution and congestion on the three residential neighborhoods
that border the park
(3) Because the Town of Queensbury should maintain its integrity as a residential area
and not allowdevelopers like the Great Escape to redefine the town by creating a
Six Flags type mega -theme park
' Sincerely,
/a�mes. Merrigan, Ph.
JPMab
' 551 Bay Road - Queensbury, NY 12804-9727 - (518) 798-4056 - FAX (518) 798-4255
3-118
I
I
September 9, 2000
Town of Queensbury Planning Board
Bay & Haviland Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
Dear Planning Board Members:
RECEIVED
S E P 1 1 200(�
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
PLANNING OFFICE
As I sat and listened to the many who spoke about the DGEIS prepared for the Great Escape,: it
became increasingly apparent that there were specifics about the document that even `lay
people" found disturbing. I know we all tend to believe engineers and consultants because we
consider them the "experts" (let's face it, their primary objective is to assist their client in getting
approvals), but I was extremely impressed by those who challenged the "experts". The topics
included noise, traffic, stormwater management, habitat, archeological preservation, lighting, and
septic. I would like to add my input to some of these areas.
Traffic will be a problem on secondary roads, such as the Glen Lake Road and Round
Pond Road. We, who live on these roads and those which connect, have already become
burdened by the current park traffic. It is nearly impossible to enter Route 9 from the Glen Lake
Road now, (or vice versa) and for this road and the others to be addressed so minimally in the
EIS clearly shows a flaw in the traffic study. Won't the increase in attendance and the proposed
traffic light configurations add more cars to these roads, as local residents try to avoid park
patronage? The Great Escape states that "proposed mitigation measures wi.11 allow potentially
affected intersections and roads to function at the same or improved levels of service as currently
exists". Well, currently there exists a problem. There is no evidence to support those proposed
mitigation measures will result in improved levels. One point five million people in 136 days on
al -mile stretch of road will certainly not improve levels of service, no matter what is proposed.
Noise has been and will continue to be a problem that the Planning Board will need to
address. Again, the EIS states that there will be "no significant impact to audible noise". This
statement is ludicrous. The Town has been listening to complaints for over two years as the
result of one ride. Still nothing has been done to mitigate this problem. I realize that in good
faith the Great Escape has tried unsuccessfully to resolve the noise issue with the Bobsled Ride,
however will they be so willing when the occasion rises again and again in the future. I don't
believe that over time, noise reduction will be a priority for the park or the Town. It will
eventually become a "live with it" mentality. The sound tests conducted were as flawed as the
traffic study in the way they were conducted. Page 3-22 defines the Glen Lake neighborhood as
follows; "There are also three distinct neighborhoods nearby. There is a group of six or seven
homes located along the southwesterly portion of Glen Lake about one-third of a mile (approx.
1,500) feet from the Park". (see also figure 3-5: Land Use Map; this does not accurately show
households). Is this a purposeful attempt to minimize the Glen Lake Neighborhood in the
DGEIS? The Glen Lake community is over 300 households. Any description or studies
performed should include all riparian landowners.
Water Quality will be affected tremendously by the proposed park expansion. The mere
statement in the EIS that the groundwater will not be impacted because no grading will occur at
or below the water table level because the groundwater table generally is more than 6 feet below
grade is inaccurate. Historically, the land upon which the existing parking lots in area C are built
3-119
1
was created by filled in land upon which gravel was placed over wetlands. The water table in
those wetlands is at the level of the Glen Lake Brook, not six feet below the parking lots. The
soils mentioned in the EIS (Hinckley, Hinckley Plainfield and Oakville) were brought in to raise
the level of the land. The engineers should have known this and for them to formulate their
conclusions without this knowledge should make all of us question the validity of their report.
Nothing is addressed in the EIS regarding trapping of hydrocarbons and other chemicals from
entering the brook, fen and Glen Lake. This is a serious oversight in the EIS. The Glen Lake
Protective Association has been working diligently for many decades and more recently pursuing
' methods to reduce nutrient loading in the lake. The Association has spent thousands of dollars
and countless volunteer hours testing, and studying ways to reduce nutrient loading and other
water quality issues. The Glen Lake Association has increased partnerships with Adirondack
' Community College, Warren County Soil and Water Conservation, New York State Federation
of Lakes, and RPI Freshwater Institute in an effort to maintain the quality of Glen Lake for
everyone. The development of a Glen Lake Watershed Management Plan was the first plan ever
' developed in New York State, has served as a model by other lakes throughout the state and was
adopted by the Town of Queensbury as a viable and useful tool in the Planning and Development
Process. Has the plan document or any of its data or recommendations been considered?
Proposed parking areas should be not impervious and certainly not be allowed to "leach" runoff
through perforated PVC piping into the groundwater table that is "not" 6 feet below the Glen
Lake Brook or parking areas. The paved parking will in years to come, (and I feel certain about
this), become the main source of water contamination for the entire Glen Lake Watershed.
Unlike any ride or amusement, you cannot mitigate the devastating damage to the watershed
after the fact.
' The Planning Board, by now, must recognize that the park has purchased land in a critical
environmental area, which is not suitable for the purpose they intended. Perhaps the biggest
problem is the fact that, as always, the Park goes full steam ahead with their initiatives before
' studying the consequences, because their corporate mentality is "time is money". Perhaps, if
they had performed the EIS back when the Planning Board first started asking for it, they may
not have purchased these lands. Their plans for the future will forever change the character,
beauty, and ecosystem of the watershed. It is time for the Park to accept their bad business
decisions and not expect the Town or the community to accept their initiatives. The focus should
be on improving and maintaining the current Park property that has sadly declined over the past
' seasons. The magnitude of the Park expansion is not in the best interest of the community, but
rather for a corporation who cannot and will not accept that there are serious negative impacts of
their plan.
' I feel strongly encouraged that the Planning Board is listening to the many people in the
community who feel that the economics of this Plan should not be the deciding factor.
S' cerely,
Virg `'a Etu
42 Nacy Road
' Lake George, NY 12845
1 3-120
I
11
I
Town of Queensbury Planning Board
attn: Craig McEwan
Bay and Haviland Rds
Queensbury NY, 12804
Dear Members:
Thomas and Michele Mayer
56 Barber Rd
Queensbury, NY 12804
September 10, 2000
RECEIVED
SEN 1 1 200
TOWN OF QUEE Y
PLANNING OFFICE
We are registering our opposition to the Great Escape Environmental Impact
Statement. The visual impact to Glen Lake from clear cutting and a ride visible to 90%
of the lake area will destroy the Adirondack feel of Glen Lake and be a huge blot on the
landscape. The removal of the tree buffer between the fen and the lake will increase the
noise level from the Park and the Northway. Paving the clear cut area will increase
harmful run off motor vehicles. Effluent from the proposed sewage plant will place a
large strain on the buffering effect of the fen.
A Six Flags style amusement park does not belong crowded into a narrow corridor
in such close proximity to residential areas. It does not fit with image the town tries to
project.
Sincerely yours
.1 . zxYi '
Thomas J Mayer
Michele M Mayer
3-121
v0PQ� ' �0
m RECEIVED
Y 3f
g S E P 11 2000 _
.)
o Jam' TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
9SFAsoNS of
PLANNING OFFICE
"Queen a� Qinerican ,L'aliea"
LAKE GEORGE REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
tP.O. Box 272, Lake George, NY 12845 * www.lakegeorgechamber.com 518-668-5755 * FAX 518-668-4286
Lake George Regional Chamber of Commerce
Resolution Number 3-2000
' Whereas, the Lake George Regional Chamber of Commerce is dedicated to the
economic advancement of the region, and
' Whereas, the Lake George Regional Chamber of Commerce realizes that tourism is
the number one industry in Warren County, and
tWhereas, the Lake George Regional Chamber of Commerce is aware that because of
tourism the economy of Warren County is increased, and
Whereas, the Lake George Regional Chamber of Commerce feels that an increase in
the tourist season would be beneficial to Warren County, and
Whereas, the Lake George Regional Chamber of Commerce is aware of the creation
of many jobs, which impacts the quality of life in Warren County, and
Whereas, in order to do this, a decision must be made to support the Great Escape by
the Town of Queensbury and the Town of Queensbury Planning Board.
' And therefore, be it resolved that, we urge you to make the public aware of the benefits
The Great Escape has to offer Warren County.
We, the Lake George Regional Chamber of Commerce, supports the Great Escape
9 PP e P
Park expansion.
This resolution is respectfully submitted to the Town of Queens Planning Board.
p y y gBoad
cott Wood, President
3-122
11
--= State of Now York
Department of Transportation
84 Holland Avenue
Albany, New York f2208--3471
FAX FROM REGION 1
PLANNING & PROGRAM MANAGEMENT
DATE- 9,
lP1�oY1✓: T� I -.g�2 j
FRONT: Kevin J. Novak PHONE: (518)473-8193
NUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER SHEET):,
COMME'*rTS:
Planning & Program Management FAX number. (518)486-4341
V1
RECEIVED
SEP111
TOWN OF QUEE SB RY
PLANNING OFFICE
1 3-123
--- -� -^- aa•%Jt nit I'J.ULV17 a uvi Inil LIU, J1Q4i'0Q;)Q r. ue
Q A 1,
STATE OF NEW YORK
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
84 HOL.LAND AVENUE
'
ALBANY, N.Y. 12208-3471
TMOMA$ C. WERNER, P.E. .1OSEPM H. a*^RDMAN
REGIONAL DIRECTOR COMM155IONER
Planning and Program Management
September 8, 2000
'
Mr. Chris Round
Director of Community Development
Town of Queensbury Town Hall
Planning Department (lower level)
724 Bay Road
'
Queensbury, New York 12804
RE: STATE ENVIRONIME1VTAL QUALITY REVIEW
DRAFT GEr Tmc ENVIRONMENTAL ]IMPACT STATEMENT
GREAT ESCAPE THEME PARY. LLC ExPANSIoN
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY, WARREN CouhTY
1
Dear Mr. Round:
We have completed our review of the above -referenced document with respect to the impact the project will
have on the surrounding transportation network. We offer you the following comments.
Mitigation Measures and Phasing of Improvements
1
1. An overall concept plan showing Route 9 from the I-87 northbound ramp intersection to Round Pond
Road needs to be provided. The plan should show all traffic and pedestrian improvements by phase. It
is unclear what exactly is proposed in the area of the existing access drives/traffic signals and proposed
pedestrian crossing. The GEIS must demonstrate that the project sponsor has control of the land
necessary to complete the transportation mitigation plan
2. The traffic study is based on a five -step incremental approach to represent an increase in annual
attendance from 900,000 visitors to an ultimate goal of 1.5 million. This approach, which comes out to
10.75 percent per year for five years, was agreed upon for the purpose of the traffic study to directly
evaluate the peak hour impacts on the adjacent roadways. We are uncomfortable, however, tying the
phased mitigation plan to annual attendance turnstile figures. There are a number of factors, such as
transit use, vehicle -occupancy rates or trip -distribution that could result in a significant deviation from
the peak hour trip -generation numbers projected. A monitoring plan including peak hour traffic counts
should be set up to determine the timing and adequacy of the proposed mitigation measures.
3. The additional sorthbound thru-lane on Route 9 proposed under Phase 3 becomes an exclusive right -turn
lane at the northern access road across from Glen Lake Road. Our experience shows this can result in
unfamiliar drivers destined elsewhere becoming trapped in the lane. The lane must be carried through
the proposed signal and then merged back to one lane south of the intersection.
Vcjffi51e i tgrea;ese�ps. wpd
' 3-124
C. VJ
-2-
4. The traffic study must evaluate signal warrants for the proposed new traffic signals along Route 9 at Glen
Lake Road and Round Pond Road. If warranted and approved for installation, would these signals revert
to flashing yellow during the off-season, similar to the existing Great Escape traffic signals?
5. The traffic study discusses signal timing optimization as part of Transportation System Management
(TSM) measures that could be used to help mitigate the impacts of the expansion. There may also be
significant benefits to the overall operation along this section of Route 9 with an interconnected system
of traffic signals. This must be evaluated, as well.
6. Based on our initial review, the proposal to eliminate the exclusive northbound approach phases at both
the Route 9/Gumey Lane and the Route 9/1-87 Exit 20 NB Ramps intersections concerns us. Motorists
destined to the interstate highway not only expect but should have a protected left -turn movement_ The
costs of this improvement in terms of traffic operation and safety weighted against the potential benefits
needs to be evaluated further.
' Parking Lots and Pedestrian Crossing
7. The proposed grade -separated pedestrian crossing of Route 9 is an essential part of the first phase of the
mitigation plan. It will be a considerable improvement not only for the safety of pedestrians but for the
vehicular traffic along Route 9, as well. We question the practicality of the pedestrian tunnel and have
concerns regarding its long term maintenance. We strongly prefer the pedestrian bridge alternative.
8. In connection with the pedestrian bridge, it is proposed that all at -grade pedestrian crossings be
eliminated. Consideration should be given to pedestrian traffic along Route 9 from nearby establishments
and the ability of this traffic to cross Route 9. In addition, what are the limits of the fencing and how will
the breaks in the fencing be controlled?
We have concerns with the ultimate effectiveness of the parking lot and shuttle bus system. The internal
circulation of the shuttle busses and the large number of patron parking maneuvers, as well as patrons
getting into and out of their vehicles, may create enough conflicts to slow the shuttle bus system down.
Should this occur and a temptation is presented for people to walk, are the fencing limits and other
restrictive means sufficient to prevent people from crossing Route 9 other than at the pedestrian bridge?
9. The phasing of parking lot improvements as outlined on Pages 2-1.8 and 2-19 of the DGEIS suggest that
the northern parking lots (Red & Yellow lots) will be completed prior to the northern section of the access
road at the Glen Lake Road intersection. If these lots are to be utilized, how will they be accessed in the
interim?
Level of Service Analvsis
The following comments should be reviewed to determine if they affect the scale of the proposed mitigation
plan.
10. With respect to the capacity analysis runs for the Route 9/Gurney Lane and Route 9/Exit 20 NB Ramps
intersections, the yellow and all red inputs should be four seconds and one second, respectively. The
analyses did not include the all red portion.
lkjntflel �greatesc;tpe,wpd
3-125
r. U4
-3-
11. The short form report printouts in the traffic impact study do not show the Peak Hour Factors used The
'
factor can easily control the results.
12. The Route 9/Route 254 analysis used the wrong operation- The existing phasing has leading left -turn-
arrows on Route 9.
13. The Route 9/Route 149 analysis used the wrong operation, as well. The side roads are split pleased. The
2004 weekday Build analysis is missing from the report.
'
If you have any questions or would like to discuss these comments further, please feel free to contact Kevin
J. Novak at (518) 474-6215.
Very truly yours,
Richard W. Carlson
Regional Planning & Program Manager
RWC:KIN
tcc:
S. Sopezyk, Adirondack -Glens Falls Transportation Council
S. Messinger, Chazen Companies
'
S. A. Johnston, Creighton Manning Engineering
W. E. Logan/M. J. Kennedy, Traffic Engineering & Safety, Region 1
'
�tgnfilel�greateacapawpd
3-126
RECEIVED
SEP 1 1 2000
' TOWN OF QUEENS
PLANNING OFFIEE 3,50 to lei �
�fu,� cc.e ns but_
Otte" vjsba c�, Oy. . l L9a V
a_ n ea.." r�s I dt-c - � .bus 1 � -to I U C1rrV
crbCtc,t' y
pbSttL 6r &4 EsLlaej_ Q
os at s a. r"—1 r d t4L
' � c � e�,l-�t � 1u.z Q�c ��-�;�c.✓ �vx-t� j w Gt � ck w ck.e d �,t b {�-Gt0 rr u,Gc, s
f/-t ��1�� pra posals w �!l lc114,Ae
/
yISC�-�yS '77�Zc dxtue- �2cvtic__ LC_- a &K r2a1tL.1
r°Sn"crx.e.s
rn
Co v,ecL >% c cc�
3� Is
cjU
u i zjGL it cam" w 14 k GLc 2-x-- du k l .b r-et,
:T� cl--Z I Cts ,oc��uc� c� ecz,¢.s t�"crorx.E ✓-cart du..
s cQ-i �spcc eLAt 1ygy sumr►1Ll,
' 3-127
H
10 olit.r� �� dim Gt�et k a,(Le�L-{�1� rc�tt rGlt i
�-
iL:V � tGi.r(�t dam' n G' / �•-�_ t �t.0 c��[ C�� LL.; �-c�_ Y-!✓c 2C iCt t,� E tL�(,,t ct_., i � �c�
J
06—
lf
-tL, -C"A`[��-
C r e ecit- Car t eL r, eC
1r
� ( e-u 2 t /{ � cry Cf L Ii�LC CL ft a dC. CC. i 9"1 e')Li`1,L O
r v
'Sol / Pi'll-n C.Lt-
inl r� �I"
`C Gti iL, O ou C C-h tlLe
&J CIL, C L%'L4" L`LgLiI— 11� / /C C.'Cd f�-C ALA C4-
L)L.4
i .t C
-f l / [Lr�.L( �Lrl d,(t ( -e J'ILLl(t � l�[C�
/Le tCe �tv 1)(,�( ILL�j, — �C`+ kenlOiline %e J L_
C tYiG�i �c s v� ej tC-[I ! Ise �C�'i�tZ c•cL't
r L-
t.C.) C}C%CtJ -� C/ ej �-j
J.1
-tIL;-J(,_ Lt,� , )�_C iCt
• i �(.' L •�f i 11 c.c -f (�F �• ,'�(L� ��3 (- c'C� � s C��Cy � Jt,2.C-i �
j-� a--4
�._ CCIS-; itC'L L� ('G110EiZt'iJ CL L�cli..7— fl�E -� f �l�C�i i�i�r S �
J L
3-128
I
-Wheoc& 1.3 S,- j
LLC 4c /it cc �t C t .rtct ; # ;,'L �u ie-,(C_ Z a
ti. �� -J �x � u LQ �! c � . c � L �
V lye' c) t rk.-L-A _
Felt /%s 7U r4
4
1<1SC tzCE ir)t_ i L_t IUll�h (�'le�.,� ! £V.iL� y� Gt-t eCtS t
VI LC v
�� �� jt l lt,(.'-�._ C� h2-� l.• � S � <C �i_�t �L.E'.. ►�i �-2-C. L !L-� I / i1 � L� L�
L'IfCti= 6� ,n LC�ic� f>E'CY'C. /�YGt�fi�S,bGil��
� J
j S LL rt_ C.0 !iA !Y l CL�1 Pre m / e- tr joc14-S L, q-l\-L r Ali C 1.i..i' ;)t C.
�CLrfCS . �_L I- Ut-L4 A -A
rc
Is ; ) &4 it a12� - C .�� ��L't, , I �( ct'. i �2T ��' !y% r✓J c(:/i cLi
cL.f � h.� �r�"�CC:f �� [�� c�eL ryt ��_� � [ c�� c.. � �%e [ La •fly cir' /PIt,���el_l cz �'-
�G
yL&4,f- .
- p�u i'Y-j i e ► YC�. ��C S � i [L_ � - r1 v i �-� -! � r c' a �-- � I � Ct,! «,�� �� s b � c � ��- c; � ,� c , --
�)(r�lc re ict6 4, .c�.
J L.
-) /l.Ls C2�,' }l C� k--C CLrt tC L�.L✓' C f�L(cL li_J'jS •i [�
r � l
Al i �7 it cC �f c> <:c
' 3-129
WHL 1 C.M J LHW
rAut. nl
WALTER J. LAW
4274 LAKE SHORE DRIVE
P.O. BOX is
DIAMOND POINT, NEW PORK 12824-0018
VOICE/FAX 519-668-2600
law@globoMM.na
N7kX
September 11, 2000
Craig MacEwan, Chairman
Queensbury Planning Board
745-4437
Re: Great Escape
Dear Chairman MacEwan:
RECEIVED
S E P 112000
TOWN N NG 0 ACE
I should like to comment on the expansion of the Great
Escape. My wife and I do not live in Queensbury but we do
travel quite frequently on Rt. 9. We use it to travel to the
supermarkets and the various big box stores that exist in
Queensbury. I use Rt. 9 to go to the Queensbury Town Court.
We try to use Rt. 9, rather than the Northway, during
snowstorms.
The Town of Queensbury, and the Planning Board in
Particular, have another opportunity to screw up Rt. 9.
Your Last opportunity, when you succeeded, was when you
allowed the large number of retail stores to be created on
both sides of Rt. 9 between Northway exit 20 and Rt. 149.
As you know, particularly on rainy days in the summer, it is
almost impossible to travel Rt. 9 in that area. In fact, on
occasion, the exit from the Northway is backed up so exiting
cars are actually stopped in the travel lanes. You people
should have known that the traffic generated by those stores
would not fit on Rt. 9, a two lane road. You should have
known that people would not only drive. from parking lot to
parking lot on the same side of the road but they would
drive from parking lot._to parking lot on the opposite sides
of the road. Of course, you knew that the stretch from exit
20 to Rt. 149 is a major link for traffic to and from
Vermont, including vacationers, skiers and commercial
traffic.
Great Escape gives you another opportunity to screw
things up. I have never heard of an amusement park that
exists on both sides of a state road. You will have to look
very carefully at the traffic situation, the expected number
of cars, etc. I am not about to make any suggestions because
3-130
-- - - • - .+i.,+......---- wn� �. v Lriw rant
' I do not know anything about traffic patterns, only the
result of screw -ups.
in the old days, Story Town closed by about 6:00 p.M.,
' was not as large as the Great Escape and did not have the
water park area. Thus, there were not as many people and the
people that were there were not there for as many hours.
' It is not realistic to turn a Story Town location into
a huge amusement complex. This would be acceptable if the
location were out in the woods someplace and an exit could
be built off the Northway. You must keep in mind that Great
Escape does not own Rt. 9 and that people who use Rt. 9 have
a right to continue to use it.
' Let's see how bad a job you do this time.
' Very truly yours,
' /Wia;l�terJ,aw
i 3 ,3,
J
H
Round Pond Road (518) 792-1186
RECEIVED
S E t 1 1 200
TOWN OF QUEEN BURY
PLANNING OFFICE
r", inC'
Glens Falls, NY 12804
September 11, 2000
' Craig MacEwan
Chairman
Queenbury Planning Board
' Queensbury Town Hall
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, New York 12804
' Re: The Great Escape — Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement ("DGEIS"
' Dear Mr. MacEwan:
At its August 21, 2000 meeting, the Board of Directors ("Board") of the Glens Falls Country
Club ("GFCC") passed a resolution expressing concern regarding the noise, traffic, visual and
aesthetic implications that would result from implementation of the generic plan proposed in the
Great Escape's DGEIS. This is written to you on behalf of the GFCC Board, the 1300 members,
' and those many other nonmembers who use and enjoy the GFCC golf course, clubhouse, beach
and other facilities and activities .
' GFCC has long been an asset to Queensbury and surrounding environs. GFCC consists of some
160 acres and includes a Donald Ross designed course which was opened in 1912 and long has
' been recognized as both beautiful and challenging. Today, there are more than 24,000 annual
rounds of golf played on this course. In April 2000, the GFCC received the Audubon
Cooperative Sanctuary certification. In order to receive this award, strict environmental criteria
' must be satisfied. There are fewer than 200 courses worldwide that have received this
certification
' Although it is a private club, GFCC has historically been available for a number of locally well-
known charitable golf tournaments such as: the American Cancer Society, the American Heart
Society, the Chapman, the ACC Foundation and the Hyde. The course has traditionally been
' open to the golf teams at both local high schools. Last year, GFCC paid some fifty-six thousand
five hundred dollars ($56,500) in school and property taxes.
3-132
Page Two
' Craig MacEwan
Chairman, Qu=sbury Planning Board
As indicated above, today there are 1300 members who enjoy the golfing, tennis, paddle tennis,
' swimming, dining and entertaining facilities at GFCC. In addition to the membership, there are
approximately 800 —1000 non-members who annually use the facilities for meetings, dinners,
wedding and anniversary receptions, etc.
Theo opposition to the Great Escape's DGEIS is directed t
ppo ape o the concerns about increased traffic
on Round Pond Road; increased noise from the anticipated growth in annual attendees, from
' 900,000 to 1,500,000; and the suggested construction of a 200 foot structure that would be used
for a new roller coaster. Although the Great Escape addresses traffic from the I-87/Route 9
' corridors, Round Pond Road serves as an artery for the east to west population travelling to
Route 9 and the Great Escape. The GFCC golf course is located on both the north and south
sides of Round Pond Road Golfers must therefore cross the road twice while playing either a 9
hole or 18 hole round. Although we have no studies to site, it is indisputable that there has been
a significant increase in Round Pond traffic creating a safety concern for golfers crossing the
road. No studies are necessary either with respect to the concern regarding increased noise.
Today, both rides and riders are audible from the clubhouse and many locations on the course.
Finally, there is a significant visibility concern about the construction of a 200 foot structure that
t would be used for a roller coaster or other ride. The visibility maps submitted by the Great
Escape demonstrates that such a structure would be visible from both Glen Lake and Round
Pond and therefore from both GFCC's first tee and eighteenth green, starting and finishing holes
' the status of which is important to GFCC and generically to many other quality golf courses. In
addition, the structure would clearly be visible from the GFCC Round Pond beach. There is a
significant concern that such a structure would also be visible from the clubhouse and other parts
' of the golf course.
The Board appreciates the difficult task confronting the Planning Board in this issue. The
' submission of the DGEIS permitted the community at large and those most impacted to express
their concerns. We respectfully request that the Planning Board disapprove the Great Escape's
DGEIS.
Thank you.
' Fry truly yours, --
Aov� 'b , wt
' s D. Horwitz
�:)
es eat, Glens Falls Country Club
U
1 3-133
' Joseph E. and Claire M. Trombley
25 Cedarwood Drive
Queensbury, N.Y. 12801-1313
USA
Home Phone 518 793-9018
SEP 13 F _
' September 12, 2000
' Queensbury Planning Board
RECEIVED
Queensbury Town Clerk $ E P 1 3 2000
Queensbury Town Building
Bay ur
Qu TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
Queensbury, NY 12804 PLANNING OFFICE
IDear Board Members,
' We are writing to express our concerns in the matter of the continuing rapid expansion of the Great
Escape. Since we moved here in 1969. we have always felt our town is a great place to live and raise a
family. We would be saddened to see this community become something less than a wonderful place to
live.
We are sure that the community of Kissimee - St. Cloud, Florida also faced this crossroad at some point
in the past when they approved Disney World and later park expansion as well as the addition of other
theme parks. I'm sure you would agree, if you have vacationed there, that it's a nice place to visit but you
would = want to five there. We would hate to see our area turn into asphalt parking lots and bumper to
bumper traffic.
The past few years have given us some small indication of the impact the relatively minor changes at the
' Great Escape have made on the quality of life in the area. It is now quite evident that the noise level,
generated at the Great Escape, has increased in our neighborhood. There is a loud and steady hum in
the background during the hours of operation. There is roller coaster sounds and patrons screams as well
as a regular opportunity to hear the sounds of shows and fireworks displays. Yet, we are told that future
tmajor expansion will not have any impact on the quality of life in our community.
' As you are well aware, the traffic in our area has become a bigger and bigger problem as a result of the
changes made over the past few years at the Great Escape. Yet, we are told that future increase in
attendance will not impact on our quality of life.
The sewage treatment plant on the high groun
d above the wetlands and Glen Lake is an obvious
concern.
Removal 'of additiona
l trees along the Northway to construct the hotel and convention center and the
resulting increased highway noise are also a major concern.
In reality we are asked to exchange the nature of our community as a great place to live for increased
' property taxes from the Great Escape, increases in our share of sales tax, and some additional seasonal
minimum wage jobs. We can not be sure that these additional revenues will even come close to the
3-134
additional costs of highway maintenance, police costs and the many additional costs both expected and
not expected related to the Great Escape's expansion plans: Please remember that someone thought
sidewalks along route 9 in Queensbury and a Burger long in downtown Glens Falls were great ideas.
We urge you to remember that the action of the planning board can truly impact the quality of life in our
community. The long term implications of your actions in this matter will make a significant impact on
you and your family as well as generations to come. We are sure that we can count on you to keep
Queensbury a great place to live.
incerely,
' Joseph E. Trombtey
Claire M. Trombley
�s
' 3-135
F
1
i
Listen to some negatives hopefully first -then
I'm hearing all the negatives but I want you to hear the
positive side —Great Escape also does many things, which help
the community.
• Martha's/Great Escape helps the Adirondack
Runners thru their sponsorship of .. The Prospect
Mt Road Race Thru their sponsorship we're able to
put on a quality race, which attracts local, and out of
town and out of state runners. This increases
revenues for local merchants.
• We purchase the shirts for the runners and
volunteers, food and awards all thru local small
business which helps keep the revenues in the
community and helps to keep these business in
operation.
• Ten % of the profits go to the Adirondack Runners
scholarship for local graduating seniors, the balance
of the profits from this race go to the Michele
Laf ountain nursing scholarship at Adirondack
Community College.
• All these things would not be possible without the
sponsorship from. Martha's Dandee Cream/ Great
Escape. When they help the Adirondack Runners
they also are helping local business, local high school
seniors, as well as bringing out of town runners and
their families to the community.
1 3-136
' Dale Nemer
15 Greenwood Ln.
Queensbury, NY 12804
Dear Planning Board:
' Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the Great Escape's expansion plan.
Noise is our family's number one concern. Frankly, day to day the screams and other related noise emitted from
the Park are tolerable but the racket produced b the Bobsled ride is deafening and disturbing both from
P Y g g our
' yard and when we are on the golf course at the local country club. I am aware that modifications were made to
the machine however there is no perceptible decrease in the noise. The vast difference in noise pollution
between the days the ride runs and does not run is enormous. QUESTION: What strides has the Town made in
' developing and implementing a noise ordinance to preserve the character of our area? QUESTION: Has the
' Town considered an ordinance to restrict the volume of noise at certain hours, i.e. 7 or 8 PM, bedtime hours for
children and some oldsters, too. I am curious if the Great Escape has considered moving toward the Virtual
tReality rides that are being added at other theme parks — an indoor thrill experience obviously easier on
' neighbors' ears. An indoor attraction is less vulnerable to a rainy summer such as this one? Think revenue! ! ! !
QUESTION: Has the Town examined the proposed new ride to be built near the perimeter of the park?
' QUESTION: Has the Town considered requiring cement or concrete barrier walls to protect the environment
' against noise ? Busch Gardens, Universal Studios and Knott's Berry Farm have moved in this
direction to protect neighboring areas.
Speaking of noise, we are concerned as to the potential increase in traffic noise from the Adirondack Northway
as a result of the proposed enlarged parking -lot AND the cutting down of land and trees, a natural buffer, on the
land adjacent to the Northway. It appears that there is sufficient parking available now as many spots go unused
each day. QUESTION: Has the Town Planning Board adequately examined the impact of the proposed
' expanded lot in terms of the heavily wooded buffer outlined in the Town Master Plan, Neighborhood 7, Page
8?
The proposed buffer will not protect neighbors from Northway noise. QUESTION: Instead of what i in
P P P � Y Q s,
' 3-137
eih-- q
essence, the clear cutting the land on the west side of ihe4ioy, has the Town considered the creation of a
parking garage? In addition, from my reading of the report, it appears that few islands of trees and bushes are
being built to replace the cut trees. No doubt the character of the area both in terms of driving on Rte. 9 and the
' Northwa from a vane of visual vantage points, i.e. Prospect MT. Y variety g P p ,the bike path, will be negatively affected.
' Clearing more land adjacent to the Northway certainly is not in keeping with its reputation as one of the most
attractive roadways in the US.
Also, cement parking lots cause heat retention, and storm water runoff. QUESTION: Have these issues been
addressed by the Planning Board? Another QUESTION— where is the spoil from the clear cutting going? This
is not clear from the report.
Traffic is a big concern and it became even more of a concern these past 2 years when we were teaching our
' two daughters to drive. It is virtually impossible to make a left hand turn out of Montray, Round Pond and
' Kendrick Roads between 4 and 630PM. QUESTION: Has the Town considered the secondary impact and
ripple effect of traffic on secondary roads including the aforementioned roads as well as Haviland Rd., the
' Orchard Park area, Rte. 149 and Bay Rd.?
QUESTION: Speaking of secondary effects, specifically how have local fire, rescue, police and ambulance
services responded to the report?
1 The character of the Adirondacks, from pine scented pillows, to the famed Adirondack chair, to the world
famous photos of Nathan Farb, to Adirondack Magazine, boasts of our home area's natural and
serene beauty. I venture to say, and hope, that more travel to our region, popular tourist mecca, to
people g � a PoP a,
fenjoy and partake in the natural outdoors than an amusement park. However, there is room for both. Although
let us not forget what was here first. It is my family's hope that the Great Escape `s Corporation doesn't forget
' what was here first and that the corporation will in all rp of their expansion plans respect the quality of the local
tair, noise, water and vistas from public and private areas. From what I have read, with some creativity the Great
1 3-138
' Escape and it designers and planners can add rides and attractions that can be exciting and yet sensitive to local
ears, in other words, not as loud as the Bobsled.
I certainly wish that I'd had sufficient time to adequately read and synthesize the report. An extension of time
o toMw-
would be in order as summer finds many of us not at home.
Thank you for your attention.
t
1 D e S. Nemer
t
3-I39
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i
i
i
1
1
1
1
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
742 Bay Road, Queensbury, NY 12804-5902 518-761-8201
TO: John Lemery
FROM: Chris Round Of, --
DATE: October 17, 2000
RE: DGEIS Comments Received — 9/14/00 through 10/17/00
Comments received regarding the DGEIS for the Great Escape are attached. This packet
includes comments received from 9/14/00 through 10/17/00.
CR/pw
3-140
"HOME OF NATURAL BEAUTY... A GOOD PLACE TO LIVE"
SETTLED 1763
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
742 Bay Road, Queensbury, NY 12804-5902 518-761-8201
Comments on the DGEIS for the Great Escape
Received from 9/14/00 through 10/17/00
10/16/00
Linda Whittle
10/12/00
Michael Danbury
10/11/00
Wm. J. Moore
10/10/00
George Stec
I0/6/00
Rosanne Meyers
10/00
S.L.Johnson
9/27/00
Marianne McGowan
9/27/00
Lisa Angleson
9/26/00
Harry England
9/24/00
Michael C. Hoffman, President - Holiday Inn
9/15/00
James Berg, ARCC
9/11/00
Andrew Patenaude, W.W. Patenaude Sons, Inc.
8/31/00
Scott-Sopczyk, AGFTC
L:\PamVAPLBD.DIR\GECommentsReceivedDGEIS10170O.doc
3-141
"HOME OF NATURAL BEAUTY... A GOOD PLACE TO LIVE"
SETTLED 1763
1
1 TEL: 518 664-7065
I
I
1
EST. 1930
%n4VstriaL (i'oatiiiys G'oszi%ctor
BEST AVENUE. P. O. BOX W8. MECHANICVILLE. NY 12118 FAX: 518 664-5241
September 11, 2000
Mr. Chris Round RECEIVED
Executive Director
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT S EP 13 ZO
742 Bay Road �`J° V�
Queensbury, NY 12804-5902 TOWN EON NG 0 F QUEENSBURY
Dear Mr. Round:
We at W. W. Patenaude Sons, Inc. would like to express our thoughts about
the planned development by The Great Escape.
We are thrilled to have a corporate neighbor in Upstate New York,
particularly in our area, that is interested in increasing it's investment.
So often we see our industrial and corporate neighbors moving away to more
friendly areas offering tax incentives or low interest loans.
The Great Escape benefits not only the town of Queensbury, but the entire
area. It provides good year-round jobs, not to mention summer jobs for students
and neighbors.
W. W. Patenaude Sons, Inc. is a construction company specializing in
industrial coatings and commercial finishes. We have watched as our industrial base
in this area has left for every other corner of the world leaving us more dependent
on our commercial and corporate centers. The Great Escape impacts our area
economically - not only with the tax revenues it creates, full or part-time jobs it
provides - but also the construction jobs it provides by routinely changing it's
park, rides and attractions, construction and maintenance.
When The Great Escape makes any changes it is not only jobs that are
created, but materials need to be purchased for such work. In our case, almost
all purchases are made locally.
The Great Escape is trying diligently to come up with a plan to meets it's
needs while impacting the town in a positive fashion.
We at W. W. Patenaude Sons, Inc. hope that an agreement can be made on the
development of The Great Escape which is beneficial to all parties.
Very truly yours,
W. W. PATENAUDE SONS, INC.
.AL7-,���
Andrew P. Patenaude
Project Manager
APP/n
c: Mr. John Collins
Mr. John Olden 3-142
• TANK LININGS • INDUSTRIAL COATINGS • EPDXIES • URETHANES • SECONDARY CONTAINMENT • EPDXY FLOORS • FIREPROOFING • INDUSTRIAL & COMMERCIAL PAINTIN
1
1
H
RECEIVED
?cook
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
PLANNING OFFICE
ADIRONDACK REGIONAL CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE
September 15, 2000
Town of Queensbury Planning Board
Queensbury Town Office Building
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
Dear Futurists:
The leadership of the ARCC is committed to businesses that support its mission statement,
"The mission of the Adirondack Regional Chambers of Commerce is
to increase and maintain the economic strength and quality of life
in the region by supporting existing businesses and industry, helping
members grow and prosper, and by assisting in attracting and
developing new businesses."
We strongly believe that The Great Escape and its owners understand their responsibility to this
community and will continue to take all reasonable steps to secure that quality of life along
with economic growth of the region's economy is achieved in accordance with the ARCC's
mission statement.
A major portion of our economic community is directly engaged in the lodging and
entertainment business. Millions upon millions of dollars flow through the collective hands of
each and every resident and taxpayer, all of which contribute to our quality of life. In order to
maintain that quality we must allow our employers to gain as much success as possible within
quality of life social and environmental parameters.
It is in our best overall interest to shape a new positive future. We must create fresh and
dynamic communities which consistently work at achieving the goal of maintaining and
increasing the economic strength and thus the quality of life in the region. We do this by
supporting existing employers and employees and assisting them to grow and prosper as well as
individually assisting in attracting and developing new economic engines in order to serve our
future as well as our past.
15YEARS
3-143 ACCREDITED
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
136 Warren Street, Glens Falls, New York 12801 0 (518) 798-1761 • FAX (518) 792-4147 OF T 6EF OF COMMERCE
OF THE UNITFO STATES
Town of Queensbury Planning Board
Page Two
September 15, 2000
ARCC is very much aware of the significance of The Great Escape's plans. It is our position
that The Great Escape should be allowed to grow, while recognizing it has a responsibility to
mitigate the legitimate concerns of our citizens and the town has a moral obligation to approve
the plans that meet its legal criteria and does so in a timely manner.
Since ely,
James A. Berg
President & CEO
cc: Queensbury Town Board
The Great Escape
ARCC Board of Directors
3-144
ED
11
U,� n tea✓
i !J
0, F!CE
September 24, 2000
Mr. Chris Round, Executive Director of Community Development
Town of Queensbury
Queensbury Town Office Building
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, New York 12804
Re: The Great Escape Expansion
Dear Chris,
I wanted to put my thoughts in writing regarding the possible expansion of the Great
Escape Theme Park. First of all, I would like to address this issue as a businessman who
owns a lodging facility in Warren County overlooking Lake George. From this point of
view. I am all for the expansion. I know that the Great Escape brings tens of thousands
of visitors to our area annually and that many of these visitors require the amenities or
conveniences of a full service hotel. The impact of the park on our facility is tremendous,
and I believe that it has become even greater since it was purchased by Premier Parks,
Inc. I suspect that the reason for the increased impact with the new ownership is that they
have a larger marketing budget and that they have implemented several new rides and
attractions in the past few years.
From the residents point of view, of which I am not (I live in Albany), I think that the
Great Escape has the moral obligation to do ail that is possible and reasonable to mitigate
the issues. These issues would include traffic flow, visual and noise, impact, as well as
other issues such as sewer and water usage. From what I understand and believe, the
Great Escape will not walk away from their responsibility to do the right thing.
With the above said, I believe that there are other factors that need to be considered. The
Great Escape is located in an area where tourism is the predominate industry. It is
probably the number two attraction in our area (at least during the summer season) with
the lake itself being number one. I firmly believe that it is the hope and aspiration of
every business to be allowed to grow and develop. Growth creates opportunities for
employees. These opportunities in turn help create the winning and consistent team that
a company must have to contend with in this very competitive market.
3-I45
HOLIDAY INN' --'LAKE GEORGE
U.S. Route 9 & 9N • Exits 21 & 22 from 1-87 • P. O. Box 231 • Lake George, New York 12845.518/668-5781
2
It is very difficult to excel in any business in today's competitive marketplace. It is my
hope that the Planning Board can find the middle ground that will allow the park the
expansion that it requests and yet satisfy all of the reasonable issues that affect the area's
residents and environment. To make matters more difficult, whatever the decision, it
needs to be done in a timely manner.
Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to express my comments.
t
Michael C. Hoffrriafi, President
Holiday Inn — Turf at Lake George
3-146
P
k
U
ADIRONDACK-GLENS FALLS TRANSPORTATION COUNCIL
WASHINGTON COUNTY MUNICIPAL CENTER, A-204
383 UPPER BROADWAY, FORT EDWARD, NY 12828
Phone: (518) 746-2199 Fax: (518) 746-2441 Email: Agftc(&aol.com
August 31, 2000V
Mr. Chris Round P
Director of Community Development
Queensbury Town Hall TOWN OF QUEENSB Y
Bay Road PLANNING OFFICE
Queensbury, New York 12804
Re: Comments on Great Escape DGEIS
Dear Mr. Round:
As requested, A/GFTC has reviewed and prepared comments on the Draft Generic
Environmental Impact Statement for expansion of the Great Escape. These comments are
attached. A draft copy of them was also provided to NYSDOT Region 1 staff for review and
consideration in the preparation of their own comments. Please contact me if you have any
questions or need any additional information.
ncerely,
ott S
Staff Director
3-147
Great Escape DGEIS Comments:
Note: A/GFTC recognizes that the DGEIS is not intended to provide the level of detail that would
be included in a site plan. Although some of the following comments may require such levels of
specific site detail for resolution, they have been included at this stage so that they might be
more thoroughly considered as more detailed site plans are prepared.
1) Parking lot layout and accommodation of shuttle service & use of bridge:
The proposal to construct a pedestrian bridge over Route 9 is a very positive step toward
reducing the pedestrian/vehicle conflicts and traffic delays that currently occur in front of the
park. For this to new connection to be effective however, it is essential that pedestrians be
conveniently and efficiently channeled to use the bridge and not tempted to use at grade
shortcuts across Route 9. The DGEIS does include several measures that begin to achieve
this (e.g. some perimeter fencing to limit access to Route 9 and the provision of a shuttle
service to take park visitors from their parking lot to the bridge crossing area), but the
available design information still raises several concerns.
First, given the extensive layout of the parking lots, it is crucial that the shuttle service be
convenient and efficient if it is to be used. The on -site circulation plan provided in volume 1
of the DGEIS does not adequately provide for efficient shuttle circulation. The lots are laid
out in such a way that the shuttle will be using the same parking lot circulation lanes and
perimeter roadway as all of the park's visitors. This will create delays in shuttle operations as
well as safety concerns as they will be forced to navigate through pedestrians in the parking
lots and other vehicles as they move to/from parking spaces. This will especially be a
problem in the late afternoon and evening hours when visitors may be leaving from a variety
of lot locations simultaneously. Without an effective shuttle, visitors will be tempted to use
Route 9 sidewalks to access the park, which will no longer have any designated pedestrian
crossing. The perimeter fencing does not completely restrict access to Route 9; breaks
occur at a number of locations that would allow pedestrians to short-cut the bridge (existing
entrances, Martha's, Hotel, north entrance, etc). Further, the recommended improvements
indicate that only the existing southern signal in front of the park will be removed. If the
northern signal remains it will be adjacent to an access driveway that will provide an obvious
temptation for pedestrians to cross if it seems quicker than the bridge.
lot it along its own
Some other theme parks that provide parking shuttles often operate
dedicated path that is used exclusively by the shuttle with well organized stops at each lot.
The existing proposal not only fails to provide efficient shuttle circulation, but also identifies
'
only minimally sized stop locations with no separated passenger waiting area. Further, the
parking lots provide no defined alternative pedestrian travel routes to/from the plaza area for
anyone who chooses not to wait for a shuttle. This also is a key element that needs to be
'
incorporated in to the design at this stage as it could impact lot layout and number of spaces
available. To further aid shuttle operation, the bridge plaza design should included a shuttle
stop on both sides of the wetland area. This would improve shuttle efficiency by keeping
lot.
southern lot shuttles from having to cross the wetland bridge into the green parking
Although this may primarily be an on -site issue, its effects could obviously extend to traffic
on Route 9 if the benefits of the bridge/tunnel are negated by poor interior circulation
designs. In addition to the issues described above, information regarding the shuttle's hours
of operation, vehicle type/capacity and numbers in operation should also be available. The
potential consequences are significant enough that this detail is needed in order to
3-148
D
P
1
L
I
I
I
P
0
adequately complete this review. The proposal to offer a shuttle is a good one that, if well
designed and operated, will be a real enhancement to the Park's facilities and perhaps
lessen negative reactions from visitors at having to pay a parking toll. A poorly designed
shuttle system on the other hand will not eliminate the current pedestrian crossing problems
on Route 9.
2) Bus Entry/Exit:
The lots layout may work for school and charter buses but will likely cause delays to transit
buses and trolleys that operate on set time schedules as they maneuver with other buses
for curb space and passengers. The Great Escape has been a regular supporter of transit
services in the past, and transit/trolley passenger boarding areas with bus pull-outs and
shelters should be considered on both sides of Route 9. They could be located along Rte 9
in the vicinity of the driveway for the "White" parking lot. This location could provide easy
access to the pedestrian bridge plaza and be separated enough from the north driveway
signal that passengers would not be tempted to cross at grade instead of using the bridge.
Another issue regarding the layout of this area is the location of the handicapped parking
area within in the bus loading area. The close proximity of these two functions suggests that
conflicts could occur. For example, will persons with wheelchairs and other mobility
impairments need to access their vehicles by passing through crowds of people
boarding/exiting buses and then pass between parked and maneuvering buses? An
alternative bus boarding/handicapped parking configuration should be considered.
3) Traffic Analysis and Recommendations
a) Peak Period & Impact - Statement on Page 3-23 vol. 1 "Even when the Great Escape is
open, it does not contribute any meaningful traffic during the morning peak hour." Is
debatable so say the least. The TIS element of the DGEIS states "The critical time
period for analysis of potential traffic impacts (is)....during the weekday and Saturday
morning peak hour" The analysis goes on to report that of the approx. 1200 veh. two-
way volume in the vicinity of the Park during the peak hour, 735 to 820 driveway trips
occur at Park lots. This volume clearly seems meaningful.
Also significant is the impact of increased park employment. The DGEIS indicates that
up to 900 additional jobs will be added at the park at full build -out (+300 full-time and
+600 part-time). Since many of these employees may arrive before the visitors, the
period of significant traffic impact in the AM may spread to cover an earlier period of
time. The effective period of changes to signal timing patterns may need to reflect this.
The travel patterns of employees are also likely to be different than visitors, with most of
them likely approaching from the south and along local roads. 900 additional employees
could pose significant traffic impacts and is only marginally addressed in the TIS.
b) Benefits from NYSDOT Improvements - The TIS makes reference (TIS pg. 14-15) to
additional to be benefits felt from NYSDOT Route 9 improvements. As was expressed
by A/GFTC to CME in earlier comments to a preliminary draft, these improvements were
essentially complete for the 1999 summer season. No additional benefits should be
expected from this project. This may be significant since the TIS later assumes no
F
3-149
P
P
P
n
u
degradation in LOS at attendance level 1 based on these improvements (and signal
timing changes) ( see TIS pg 21).
c) Exit 20 Signal Timing Changes - An essential element of the proposed signal timing
changes is the elimination of the exclusive northbound phase at the northbound ramps.
While this may improve the overall operation of the intersection it will also impair access
to the northbound ramp of 1-87 for northbound Route 9 traffic (111+ vph). The LOS for
this northbound left movement under the proposed phasing change is not presented in
the TIS. Since this is an interstate approach it is a significant movement and deserves
more extensive discussion and presentation of the analysis. Given the high volume of
southbound traffic, it is unlikely that unprotected northbound lefts will be possible.
Further, references to the proposed timing change suggest that it will only be required
for the "peak" period. This peak period needs to be better defined (10:00am to 11:00am?
9:OOam to 11:00am? PM also?). NYSDOT needs to determine the significance of this
concern, as well as the significance of potentially diverting these 111+ vehicles per hour
further north through the outlet area and through the Rte 9/149 intersection to the Exit 21
northbound ramps. (see previous comments)
0
3-150
RECEIVED
r
H
1
�J
P 0 Z000
LISA T. ANGLESON TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
118 Benjamin Street, Schenectady NY 12303 / anglesonjl(BLprmet.com Home: 51 a fi j �AOFFICE
September 27, 2000
Planning Board
Town of Queensbury
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
Dear Members of the Planning Board:
I have been a long distance observer of the changes to the Route 9 corridor that encompasses the Great
Escape, Martha's, The Coachman, and the now defunct Animal Land, etc. My husband grew up in
Twicwood, and during our thirteen -year marriage we have returned many times to visit his parents and
enjoy the area. We have lived in Alaska, Virginia, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania, only moving to
Guilderland, NY within the last year.
The changes along Route 9 between visits have been minimal at times, but within the last three
years have been monumental and not necessarily for the better. The Great Escape's land acquisitions and
plans to enlarge the park severely impact this section of Route 9. 1 understand the need for economic
growth in the area, but The Great Escape is not going to provide what the surrounding communities need
for economic growth. The Great Escape provides short-term summer employment, and can only provide
long-term employment to a limited number of people by expanding into, and infringing upon, the
immediate community areas. This is not sustainable economic growth, and in fact harms the quality of life
in the surrounding neighborhoods in exchange for a limited number of jobs.
The Great Escape has already changed the beauty of the community. They will only continue to
irreversibly damage the landscape with long expanses of pavement, the deforestation of the corridor, more
and more rides that can be seen from afar, incredible amounts of traffic, damage to the area watershed with
runoff, and increased noise. The Planning Board must take notice of the negative patterns of expansion the
community already suffers with in regard to traffic and noise. The Great Escape's expansion will not aid
your community; it will only further deteriorate the neighboring communities and the entire area into a
commercialized eyesore that will not attract visitors. The commercialization of the neighborhoods will also
effect the livability of the area, giving prospective residents a reason not to move to the area.
The expansion plans submitted by The Great Escape have many discrepancies, and the proposed
changes are horrifying to consider. Please, carefully evaluate the impact of the proposed plans, and listen
carefully to the community concerns during the decision -making process.
Sincerely,
Lisa T. Angleson
3-151
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
RECEIVED
September 27, 2000
TOWN OF OUEENSBURY
PLANNING OFFICE
Queensbury Town Planning Board
Queensbury Town Hall
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 14204
Re. Great Escape DGEIS
Dear Planning Board Representatives;
I am writing as a citizen of Queensbury and resident of Glen Lake to comment about the proposed Great
Escape Expansions as outlined by the DGEIS. I am opposed to the following proposals as outlined by the
Great Escape (see below).
t First as a precursor I'd like to comment on the Great Escape's location. As anyone can see, the Great
Escape is located smack dab in the Glen Lake watershed. When one looks at the lay of the land from
Round Pond through to Glen Lake you first encounter the Great Escape parking area (formerly wetlands).
The Great Escape Swan ride then takes one through the stream that flows into the Glen Lake Fen at the rear
' of the park. With today's wetland protections the Great Escape would never had been allowed to fill in the
wetlands or propose to locate a park in its current location.
Secondly, Six Flags (formerly Premier) was well aware of the constraints of the Great Escape when it was
purchased. They purchased a landlocked park smack dab in the Glen Lake Watershed bordered by three
residential communities. For Six Flags to propose an expansion of this magnitude in an environmentally
t sensitive area closely bordered by residential communities is unconscionable. As citizens we'd all like to
have the freedom to make unencumbered changes to our properties. However, for the good of the town
zoning laws exist which restrict unwise and intrusive development. This proposed expansion to benefit the
Six Flags corporate coffers is unwise zoning development for the Town of Queensbury. Therefore, It is my
' belief that Six Flags DGEIS claim of negligible water quality, traffic, noise, stormwater management is
flawed for the following reasons:
1. First and foremost: the addition of 600,000 more visitors to the confined location of the Great Escape
is simply too much for the sensitive environmental and residential area that surrounds Glen Lake.
Sure, I'd like to build a 1,000 foot home on my 40 foot lake access lot on Glen Lake but Queensbury
'
has zoning regulations that prevent this. However, if you'd give me a variance to build I could even
rent it out and by doing so generate valuable tourism jobs and dollars for our community! Obviously
have not pursued this flawed endeavor because I realize that my lot is simply to small to build a home
and also preserve lake quality. The same situation exists at the Great Escape. The usable land
available to the Great Escape is simply to small to support that level of expansion AND most
importantly preserve what's left of the Glen Lake ecosystem. Six Flags should not be allowed to bully
the Town of Queensbury into approving an inappropriate expansion. The addition of minimum wage
'
summer jobs will not offset the negative impact the expansion will have on Glen Lake, surrounding
communities and the Town of Queensbury.
' 2. Adding a 200 room hotel and parking on the land bordering Rt 9 and the Northway will increase the
already intolerable Rt. 87 and Rt. 9 traffic noise on surrounding communities - including Glen Lake.
' All area residents currently have for a noise buffer from Interstate 87 are the pine trees that border Rt.
87 and Rt. 9. Removing these trees will make living in Courtyard Estates impossible. Take a walk
1 3-152
'
th rough their neighborhood one evening. All that is heard now is the unceasing overwhelming noise
of Rt. 87.
3. Storm runoff.
Removing the buffering trees along Rt. 9 and within the park will increase the runoff into the Glen
Lake fen by funneling additional nutrients and sediment into the lake.
4. Proposal of a treatment plant.
Treated wastewater and stormwater runoff which can include oils, antifreeze etc. From 1.5 MILLION
VISITORS MUST NOT be deposited back into the Glen Lake Fen. Proper treatment of Sewage and
stormwater runoff carrying a host of pollutants are difficult to treat properly. It is unlikely that a for
profit corporation that has YET to be responsive to the surrounding community with no history of water
treatment would run a plant properly. The Great Escape with its current increase in visitors must be
forced to extend and tie into the Glens Falls sewage plant. Additionally, the Glen Lake area does not
have access to a municipally treated water supply. Residents who rely on lake water for household use
are at risk. Its about time Queensbury installs the infrastructure to support the development that already
has occurred at the Great Escape, the Outset Malls and yes, at Glen Lake.
5. Paved parking lots\paid parking
The Great Escape is proposing increasing storm runoff by paving the parking lots. Even with the best
of intentions paving will increase drainage into the Glen lake ecosystem. There is already way too
much improperly drained asphalt in that park. The park should be made to installing catch basins..that
feed tainted stormwater into the Glens falls Sewer system. Paved parking simply is not needed.
Additionally, the proposed ring road and sure to come paid parking will only aggravate traffic on Route
9 as people look for ways to avoid paying parking fees. Locals will spend twice as much time on Rt 9
shuttling people back and forth.
'
6. A 200 foot structure not causing a negative visual impact.
Once again the suggestion is simply absurd. A 200 foot amusement park ride simply is incompatible
with the surrounding community which borders the Adirondack Park. It would be approx. twice as
'
high as the tallest building in Glens Falls which is considered an out of place eyesore.
7. No additional noise impact on surrounding communities.
For those of us who hear the unceasing never ending noise for three years of the Alpine Bobsled from
'
May through October already know about the noise impact the park has had on our homes. Housing
values have decreased and the sound is never-ending and maddening. Since the Bobsled installation I
'
wish I lived near the Albany airport - it would be much quieter and at least I'd get a noise break
between takeoffs.
plane
To summarize this point I'm not from Missouri but I believe the Bobsled issue has demonstrated to
'
the Town and citizens of Queensbury how it conducts its business. with the town. First the residents
noise concerns were ignored; and then a ill advised failed solution was tried to placate its citizens while
attempting to push through expansion. Before any future "enhancements" at the Great Escape are
allowed the noise from the Bobsled must stop. If it takes removal so be it. Noise of this magnitude on
'
communities would not be permitted by any other business. Its time Queensbury adopted some tools to
shut the Bobsled noise down and prevent this from happening again.
8. Impact on Glen Lake Road Traffic
Once a traffic light is installed at Glen Lake Road additional park traffic will end up on Glen Lake
Road from those visitors coming from northwest of the park (Vermont, Washington County) to avoid
149\Rt. 9 and gain easy entrance to the proposed parking lots. Glen Lake is a hilly, twisty road with a
'
35 mile a hour speed limit that is NOT enforced. Most importantly the Warren County Bike Path has a
BLIND road grade crossing at Glen Lake when going north towards Lake George. Under the current
proposal of a traffic light at Glen Lake road will result in more park traffic on Glen Lake road which
1 3-153
will exacerbate an already difficult crossing with cars coming around curves at between 45 - 50 miles
an hour that you cannot see and cannot see you.
In closing, I believe that the contentions of Six Flags in the DGEIS are flawed due to my points enclosed in
this letter. I would remind you of the Town of Queensbury's seal and motto. The seal depicts a mountain,
tree and stream - NOT a 200 foot roller coaster. It also states that Queensbury is a nice place to live. So far
I have not found this to be true - but as an optimist I hope that the Planning Board has the courage to stand
up to Six Flags Corporation and say NO - your expansion plans are simply too much in too small an area e
with too much negative impact on close by existing communities. I have a dream....
Sincerely,
Marianne McGowan
3-154
TO: The Town of Queensbury, NY R E C E- 1 V E
RE: 2nd Comment on: The Great Escape Theme Park "DGEIS"
By- S. L. Johnson, Queensbury and Glens Falls-N 79 - 9 0 -' -r-
T OWN OF QU S'1 Y
tr PLANNING OFFICE
The Draft Environmental Impact statement (DGEIS) for the Great Escape
Theme Park directly addresses improved visitor accommodation. Several
impacts discussed appear to address improved transient accommodation
while diverting attention from more substantial issues relevant to the
indigenous population. Outlined here are several topics that aim at the direct
sensible impacts from Great Escape/Six Flags (the Park) expansion in
Queensbury NY.
1. TRAFIC IMPACTS
Existing public roadways, other than Interstate 87, were not planned
or are they constructed, to allow the traffic flow anticipated by the Park.
Residential roadways in the vicinity of the Park have recently become heavily
traveled by commercial and other drivers wishing to avoid Rt 9 conjestion in
the miles before and after the Park.
Traffic volumes along all local roadways East of I87, North of
Aviation and Quaker roads, South of Route 149, and West of Bay Rd. during
'
Park actual peak and nadir attendance should be empirically determined.
Implications differ with presentation methods. Therefore actual
measurements, counts, and tangible evidence must determine impacts.
Knowledge of Traffic volumes durring December and January should be
compared with traffic volume July and August to judge the impact of Park
operation.
' 2. WATER QUALITY M PACTS
Addition of paved parking lots, the proposed "ring road", and removal
of existing vegetation will increase run off from land beneath these
environmental modifications. Introduction of subsurface "infiltration
' galleries" mentioned will quite likely control surface water run off. A major
concern is the direct infiltration of a large quantity of water (previously taken
up, used, and exhausted by vegitation) directly into the existing warershed.
This infiltrated water, from roads and parking surfaces, will contain much oil
by-product contamination that will have an effect on the natural "digestive
' process" of the wetland fen downstream from the Park and upstream to Glen
Lake. Disturbance of the elements that "feed" the fen will alter functioning
tin a bio-geographic area that works like a natural liver or kidney with water
Page 1 of ,3
3-155
TO' h u . The Town of Q eensbury, NY
t RE: 2nd Comment on: The Great Escape Theme Park "DGEIS"
By: S. L. Johnson, Queensbury and Glens Falls, NY 792 3927 October 2000
'
entering Glen Lake. Atrophy or luxuriate growth in the fen will change the
water quality in Glen Lake. Posible solution listed at C.
tThe
B. Waste water/Sewage
proposed "state of the art tertiary sewage treatment plant" seems
able to process waste water into "virtually drinking water quality" effluuent,
as the Park's DGEIS Executive Summary of 7/28/00 states. Many people
live around Glen Lake and downstream from the Park. These Town of
'
Queensbury residents actually, rather than virtually, use water that has passed
through the Park before passing to them. Would the the Park willingly serve
its own treated waste water to its guests?
'
C. Possible amelioration
Rather than undergo complexities and expense duplicating existing
sewage treatment facilities, using the funds earmarked for building a plant to
simply pipe effluent to existing municipal facilities would protect area
residents, visitors, natural habitats, the beauty of the Glen Lake fen, Glen
lake, and attractive residential areas near the Park.
3. VISUAL IMPACTS
Proposals to modify existing by leveling hills, and creating
increased visibility from I87 (identified at one time as America's Most
'
Scenic Highway) seems a flagrant visual impact. Efforts should be directed
toward a public ideal of visibility-. That is, maintaining Route 187 as a
'
non-commercial corridor of respite from intrusive visual invasion. Could the
Park use some concept like "Invisible From Outside"to guide their
expantion?
"Night lighlinC is proposed to be less intrusive than "Aviation Mall
and other commercial parking lots in Town", however the writers fail to note
'
topographic differences in sight lines between the Park or "other
commercial" areas. Additionally page iv of the Executive Summary for
t
DGEIS for the Park states that modifications in "existing established area of
the Park (Park Area "A") will not be visible from outside the Park." Will
Park areas identified with other letters be visible? Could the Park use some
concept like "Invisible From Outside"to guide their expantion?
Rides with elevations above existing tree cover appear to allow clear
sight of those rides from most areas surrounding the Park; that is, Glen Lake
surface NE of the Park and I87 to the West. Could the Park use some
concept like "Invisible From Outside"to guide their expantion?
'
Page 2 of .3
3-156
1
1
1
TO: The Town of Queensbury, NY
RE: 2nd Comment on: The Great Escape Theme Park "DGEIS"
By: S. L. Johnson, Oueensbury and Glens Falls, NY 792-3927 October 2000
4. AUDITORY IMPACTS
Because sounds (I. E. spoken words, music, machinery) base much
human activity discussion about "auditory impacts" often becomes
obfuscated. Judging the actuality of audible impacts before sounds are made
is difficult. The Park asserts its project "will not have adverse visual or
audible noise impacts ...." "Adversity" requires evaluation of visual and
auditory intent. Similarly with visual impacts some principle like, "Inaudible
From Ourside the Park" could guide impact measurement.
5. IMPACT OF EXISTING
The Park, in its several itterations over decades, is debatably the first or
second oldest in the country; this gives it historical value. Many other parks
throughout the world emulate its success. The Park has grown from a small
attraction for children into a multimillion dollar tourist Mecca employing .:-
many people. The Park provides sensations and experience sought by many,
but not all 12eople. Large numbers of people go past the Park in preference
for less humanly created attractions visible only in this part of the world;
Northern NY and the Adirondacks.
Measurement of sensible effects created by the Park seems central to the
Environmental Impact issue.
1. What impacts exist with, and without, park operation?
a.Traffic Flow
b. Water Usability
c. Area Appearance
d. Area Ambient Sounds
Undoubtedly the park will create differences in these four conceptual
areas. To what degree will history accept these changes?
Modification of the existing has robust implications. As a private
enterprise that invites others to visit this area, the Park has an obligation to
the indigenous public. That obligation, stated simply and directly in a
family situation might sound like:
"Yes, you can invite your friends over for a parry. Have fun, but remember;
don't block the driveway, don't make a mess, clean up after yourself, and
don't disturb the neighbors."
Page 3 of 4
3-157
I
1
1
1
11
1
RosQfine N(eyers
_U� (ZO awe&wd
TOWN Cr ^vCE s FRY Queensbur) , AN 128011
PLANNING Cr ,�� - j-et . 761-9 loq ! 01 (0 1(313
A!1 4)a� any Fur4ier e, p nylon off' the Qreaf t5-cclpe
-amusement irk would feSUO 1* /rlo 1 poise , anc/Z? MdA9e
and snore of evasterrn fa the sari oulV i)?? landsc pe, cvef1wn
curd Ae qualify of Cie o f our' C7on?manl�l. .
7he �r zf aeaoe would like 7b exkrd /ts park9 a. rZa
by e%rinq land on lG rd Pond had as well as lev�ell'111
and clea5nq Me h;11 fa Ae samosef /co 1. Tie a/Oen
Spaces Caused 6/ �h!s bukher/' Gu;ll %rt ereXe 40/5e
levels from A.e PrA- as well as A e AAA way. lJho wad
4o hear more ride,S more- screa w? nq �O m o/e and more
�'�ie ? .1fs nod ryht � r�srd�fs l«��9 .flea-, a/V
r�o�=so -year, Me- AI!{ f o have �o Y-o%rde mote (?Ialnor
and more deli ac7�on Aofh2 �� bent i o�'our t..
The parks draFy SU39e515 fralr e 1;ghts. be /nS1t(j/ d
on Po use 9 a�- Gkn Lake A d - an d Rc and And Road.
GJho wants 7b si f M rdh /yore. �mW c A pel es�r
+U.nne4 or 6 r'td e. a+- +he- Park, Roc�-e 9 e�1mom is an
I M 'Prbu eme
- I �t is need �1. The expansion c)� +he Grp- Fscapz wot&ld woe
ojfer)&ence_ FT-O rn 400,000 to t . 5' M i ll t bn . who W ill b2
{may ing - br +he- ujea W-6 +ear- on our f-c)ads Pram -one
c2Vce3s jve amour* o� +rbjp c ? tJho warrA-s to QE in
nis tr,0. i�- Who w wi +a 4�R �t hip +-���►c:
tAj ho woni-S -�O s2e ra e.5 and park mg lots.. 0P
-W�2 e. c rr ef*-porvJ-5 atot� Rock-e 9 tend Round Rand -fit
i -`b - fr p
one. {irk propo�s +o w Id 4n on -life. �e�
plan- - =a tosFall pipes fo release ; 6s 3Vow wa3-et'. runoff
Whaa� 4 ee ' will +fie. propaseA crange5 have on Gkvi W
.whose princ.►pfe wo&e source. runs thrbv�h *e Gre
3-158 49- oLLW4\i o��2 k�'or Glen Lke shouid +O ke ,
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Su.ppor�(?(-s of the C ra3i- Es(zapZ eApans100 Clairn i1 aY
i �- will pt-66 - VIGM.. jobs. Do we rv, l\ 1 r EQCI Mfle- 1011-Fay lr�
.seas o na1 obs when fhe closs i `teis co nto m Pages -Upon Mes
of pbs - o iS . n0zVV Q ,
The Ad►rondack R�6ncal Chombers oP Commerce feels Ad e.
r* eXpanSlon '. woutcl `' InCr2ase e eeonom�c Sib and, ih(45
fh•e q)ualily o� l��e: tn. fhe regioo-'I, Dj they. htnk mosf
people* .ecru. going fo have any or.11017ey afkr�
�isr�n9 -he Great Eseape 'fo �franl ze . loyal businesses
The C�� &(?ape expar�slor0 Is ftof rJece=ry --1 f ►s For
fhe - prk' beneP#--•.Lf -1he Gre& E,,-ccPe Park p ws
so cv'�1l ; its-., nolok, ►b fm FiRdl c nd it over e-Arr' n�
For rend et?t - ,mot a ' ual ► fy of //�fe � re
-fo ,bag about
Curl ent coed d z&15 o f the tEscape �muserfe& Pk
are not: eery ornus]and -should de IM prbvel before
en ..ex psjox are. allouu d. l*gar�y of Ae antMa/i5
Y e- 1 v a eol7 i hbnS .
display are er�cbsc- In r�l,er I i 9
7� e ' Slorybwn' Sectl66 Is run doulr7 wj�A- IM17y afyrmtions
-haf shoW d be .Pe3tOred. or P�Paced . In- Sid OF90tirx�
eUrT91 z2.OF s ayrac osSGuith
S -fink - mast peopre %1- Ma- - Me gtat- E cffluxrlmt
parp 1':5 -bi enough— and fhe pp�� expanS& ►lfbo
9' wifhin 616Ms lakes and
:mass 1 ve dtamm�l w ,
r�es�dentral a�.s ; p e ark mu sf c ide1' the �1eedS aid
.concerns of ifs Ac 1 hborn - x hope ouy' e-om nurnsty Leaders
:wR l I ls� +o -one People -fhey.serve by skpp n - .the Gme Cscnpe
Rbnrt . becr�m�r� o, Greg M, g-tc�ke", at�d . pres ffq 44,e
+tuc-Mess (f our GLUe- 3bury M*
. "Home- ck- nataro-1 lo".. _ a 9
ood place- +6 1
3 -15 9 ` ' 1�--
I
1
1
11
1
1
1
245 Butler Pond Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
October 10, 2000
Town of Queensbury Planning Board
Town Center
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
ATTN: Craig MacEwan, Chairman
Dear Chairman MacEwan and Members of the Queensbury Planning Board:
i....� LE ; V... at.v'
nT
ll/
T 0 W N 0= OU!E:rE U ,l'
PL N&INIG OFF! E
This letter contains my personal opinion and input pertaining to the DGEIS for "The Great Escape
Theme Park," proposed expansion located on Route 9 in the Town of Queensbury. I request this letter be
entered into the record for this proposal and my input seriously considered with my questions answered. I also
want to commend you and your board for requesting the DGEIS, scheduling the public hearing and extending
the deadline period for further comments and review. Thank you.
Some of my major concerns and possible solutions are as follows:
1) Increased traffic - others will address this in detail I'm sure. The proposed ring -road and any changes
with the existing roads will not bear the increased traffic. Improvements to the current and proposed
increase in traffic will be just that - improvements, but not a solution! The geographic location of the
park itself dictates the corridors of ingress and egress. Its location at the bottom of a geographic bowl
with only north and south approaches. Venturing into the perimeter of the bowl is encroaching into the
residential neighborhood of Twicwood, Glen Lake and Courthouse Estates.
2) _Parking improvements - these will concentrate and cause an increase in storm water runoff. How will
all the oil, antifreeze, brake -fluids, grease, etc., from the automobiles be contained and prevented from
entering the Glen Lake eco system? What is your storm water management plan?
3) Wastewater disposal - the only solution to this problem is to ship it out of the park altogether via a
municipal sewage pipe. There is a regional built sewage treatment plant in the City of Glens Falls.
There is in place a sewer line within a few miles of the park. Connecting into this municipal system is
paramount to any other proposal. This is a permanent solution to a very serious problem. Why is this
not being done?
4) Noise - the adjoining residential communities definitely should be accommodated in not having their
' current quality of life compromised by increased noise both during the day and night and over a longer
period of time by an extended season. Eliminate or minimize this by shorter hours of the day and a
shorter season.
5) Economic benefits - there are some but not as our as great comments in the DGEIS
g y states. When one
looks at the potential depreciated value of the homes in the residential areas adjoining the park, I see big
losses of property values guaranteed. What is proposed to compensate these people for the property
value decrease?
3-160
Page 2
tThe taxpayers living in the Queensbury School District will not benefit from the proposed expansion as
the park lies within the Lake George School District. Queensbury will get the problems generated by the
expansion but the Lake George School District will get the financial rewards. What benefit will the
t Queensbury School District receive?
The sales tax on a $33.00 ticket is .6% - not the 7% that the DGEIS implies. Why not increase this tax
to pay for the connection to the municipal sewage line?
6) Trade show convention center facility - why include this when one is being proposed for being located
in the Village of Lake George? Why not make a substantial "donation" to ensure its existence? This
consideration would definitely help the "region" and certainly take off additional pressures on the parks
' environment. Economics come and go but the environment will always be there. Pure and pristine or
polluted!
7) Visual impacts - why is the limit of visible impacts only considered to the close proximity of the park as
illustrated in the DGEIS? In volume I, page iv, paragraph 4, the statement is made "while virtually all
modified development in the existing established area of the park (Park Area "A"), will not be visible
from outside the park, this EIS also studies the potential for new attractions such as rides to create visual
impacts." My home is two miles from the park and I can clearly see 6 rides protruding above the trees
already. I find these offensive and definitely marring the landscape from mine as well as others point of
view living away from the park.
At this point I would like to address specifically the Biological Environmental Resources as they will be
noticeably affected by the expansion proposed.
In volume 1, page iv, paragraph 3, there is a statement that reads "No protected species of plants or
animals exist on the site." In same volume page 3-5, paragraph 5, the first sentence states table 3-2 "Flora of
the Great Escape Lands East of Interstate 87," lists the scientific and common names of all plants identified
growing in Park Areas A and C." On page 3-10, there appears in this list wild lupine, scientific name Lupinus
perennis. This plant "is the only known food plant for the larvae" of the Kamer Blue butterfly (Lycaeides
mehssa samuehs), an endangered species.
In volume 3 of the DGEIS in "appendix 5, Letters of Record," there is a letter from the U.S. Department
of the Interior dated January 11, 2000, and addressed to Dr. Richard P. Futyima of the LA group. That letter
deals with the endangered species the Kanner Blue butterfly. I quote paragraph 5. "An evolution of existing
habitat at the respective proiect sites, and its potential to support the Kanner Blue butterfly or wild lupine.
should be completed. If the evolution indicates that the site has the potential to support the Kanner Blue
butterfly or its habitat, the site should be surveyed by a qualified person to determine the presence or absence of
this species." By your own admission you have listed the wild lupines as growing in Park Areas A and C! !
The following paragraph states "the respective projects environmental documents should identify any
direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts on the Kanner Blue butterfly or its habitat, and include appropriate
measures if necessary, to protect this species and its habitat." The letter states that the information gathered
should be forwarded to its office for evaluation for its potential impact on the Kamer Blue butterfly or its
habitat to "determine the need for further consultation pursuant Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act."
' There is on file in the planning department of the Town of Queensbury a report prepared by Michael S.
Batcher, M.S., consulting Ecological and Environmental Planner. The report was prepared March 15, 1998,
and its tittle is "Report on 1997 Survey for Lupine (Lupinus perennis) Sites and Kamer Blue butterfly
3-161
Page 3
1
11
I
I
(T-ycaeides melissa samuelis) Populations In The Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York. In this
report there are six (6), lupine sites that have been identified and mapped that basically encircle the Great
Escape's properties. Site No. 1, is located on Rt. 9 on tax I.D. parcel #74-1-8, which is the Samoset property
owned by the Great Escape and scheduled for development as part of Park Area C!! Site No. 4, identified as
the 187 North site is located in Park Area B owned by the Great Escape. These two sites alone, not to mention
the other 4 sites are examples and proof enough that the whole land holdings constituting the Great Escape Park
should be resurveyed to locate and identify the lupine plant - the only known food plant for the Kamer Blue
butterfly larvae. Within the last 5 years or so, Park Area C, the proposed site for the parks expansion has been
heavily logged thus improving the site for the expansion of the lupine plant habitat. This logging and the time
elapsed since it was done has made this area conducive to the expansion of the lupine habitat. Again, I redirect
your attention to paragraph 5 in the letter from the U.S. Department of the Interior dated January 11, 2000, and
addressed to Dr. Richard P. Futyma of the L.A. group which requires a reevaluation and/or survey of the site.
My question is, has this been done? The N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation should also be
contacted on this very critical issue and a survey requested.
I find the section 3.2 Biological Environmental Resources to be inadequately addressed. On page 3-5 of
this section the 2"d paragraph states, "Dr. Norton Miller, Principal Scientist with the New York Biological
Survey, who discovered the rare plants, has described the wetlands as "remarkable" and expressed concern that
steps be taken to avoid changing the sites water chemistry. On site disposal of sewage and storm water runoff
have to be adequately addressed. How is the Great Escape going to do this?
Pertaining to Wildlife section 3.2.3., paragraph 1 states, "A list of wildlife species observed on site, in
addition to those which could potentially inhabit the site due to their regional occurrence and habitat preference,
is presented in Table 3-3 "Potential Wildlife Occurring on the Great Escape Properties." When you look at the
"Table" which is very lengthy there are three columns, one is common name, the second column is Scientific
name with a #1, and the third column is Habitat with a #2. The table lists I, AYIFAUNA, II, MAMMALIAN
FAUNA, III, REPTILIAN AND AMPHIBIAN FAUNA. These basically are birds, mammals, reptiles, snakes,
frogs, salamanders and turtles. At the end of the table there is a key that indicates what the numbers represent,
#1 representing the taxonomy (common and scientific name), #2, Habitat types and #3, which was not part of
the table, as indicating "species observed during on -site investigation." My question is, of all the wildlife listed,
what species were actually observed by the LA Group biologist? How many times did they visit the site and at
what times of the year?
There is in the Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) section "182.6 endangered species, threatened
species and species of special concern." The list has Malluses, Insects, Fishes, Amphibians, Reptiles, Birds and
Mammals. It is not just limited to birds, mammals and reptiles as is indicated on "Table 3-3 Potential Wildlife
Occurring on the Great Escape Properties." In the DEC list of "species of special concern" there appears 3
amphibians, one reptile and 3 birds that also appear in your table 3-3.!! These are the Jefferson salamander,
Blue -spotted salamander, and Spotted salamander, all Amphibians. Also, the Wood turtle, a reptile and the
common barn -owl, common night hawk and the Eastern bluebird, all birds. On the DEC list of "Endangered
Species," is listed the insect Kamer Blue butterfly, which I've discussed previously in my comments.
On page 3-11, at the bottom of the page the last sentence states, "No rare, threatened or endangered
I wildlife species are known to exist on the site nor were any observed by L.A. Group biologist." I have a lot of
question that statement brings up.
Let's talk about the malluses, amphibians and fishes that are also mentioned in the ECL "Endangered
species, threatened species and species of special concern." In the parks expansion plan they will be crossing
streams and infringing on the wetlands. Since the park is situated in a "geographical bowl," a lot of these
3-162
Pan 4
construction and earth moving activities will have the potential to "accidentally" infringe into the waterways.
What affect will any infringement have on the malluses, amphibians and fishes that exist therein?
Surveys and a complete inventory of all aquatic plants and animals should have been done. Before the park
threatens or infringes into the waterway it should be imperative that these surveys and inventories be done.
Who knows what rare or endangered species exists, unless an inventory is done and everything recorded. This
inventory should be mandated. In the DGEIS the vegetation and wildlife aspects were inadequately conducted
and tabulated. There are many parts of the DGEIS where professional input stresses the uniqueness of this area
which suggest a more detailed study of the vegetation and wildlife be undertaken. Don't leave anything to
chance.
In closing, my opinion of the DGEIS is that it's incomplete in many areas and appears to have been
hastily done. The vegetation and wildlife aspects above have been inadequately presented. I feel* they have no
idea what they have in the way of their unique, critical environment. The question of the Kamer Blue butterfly
habitat has to be more throughly investigated. The habitat is present in the proposed "Park Area C." The red
develonmentH Overall, I can best summerize this proposed project as trying to put 10 pounds of sugar in a 5
pound bag.
Thank you for taking the time to address my concerns. You've got a big job in reviewing this proposal
and I do appreciate your doing so.
F1
LI
Sincerely,
,Y J&-)
George I Stec
Resident Town of Queensbury
1 3-163
1
19 Twicwood Lane
Queensbury, NY 12804-1330
October 11, 2000
Queensbury Planning Board
c/o Queensbury Town Clerk
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
To whom it may concern:
As you can see from the above address I live in the Twicwood area of Queensbury fairly close to
the Great Escape. I will start out by saying that I do not consider the Great Escape a bad neighbor nor the
devil implied by many. There are times that the noise level from there and other businesses in the area gets
somewhat high and even objectionable, but not to the point where a "moratorium" should be put on future
plans. If anything, the other businesses in the area should be required to conduct there own Environmental
Impact Statements and conduct themselves in an appropriate manner, better than some have in the past and
are doing so today. If requirements are to be put on one Company or Organization they should be applied
fairly to all.
In summary, I believe that the Great Escape should be allowed to proceed with expansion plans.
These plans should be carefully and reasonably developed to protect both the Company and the
surrounding areas, including all of Queensbury and the City of Glens Falls. This will mean reasonable
cooperation between Queensbury and Glens Falls, which in many cases seems hard to attain. Following is a
list of ideas and suggestions that I would feel should be applied while making decisions and during the
implementation of expansion.
1. The Great Escape's plans must address the issues that many people are concerned about,
especially the environment.
2. The Planning Board must review these plans without bias and consider Great Escapes needs for
' the next year.
3. The City of Glens Falls and the Town of Queensbury officials must work together for sewer
and other concerns that can protect the environment and provide economical solutions for the
Great Escape.
4. The noise situation that exists in this area comes from many areas. Hopefully the noise study
that was recently conducted will develop some possible solutions for this and these will
be implemented by the governing bodies in place. This includes the contacting of and working
' with State Department of Transportation for noise from the Northway. Many areas of the
1
1 3-164
IM
Country have installed noise barrier walls along Interstate highways to muffle traffic noise. I
believe that this should be investigated for the section of the Northway between exits 19 and
20.
' 5. The Great Escape, the Town of Queensbury and the City of Glens Falls should agree to a
committee being formed that will agree to work with the Great Escape to make things happen
in a cooperative manner. This committee would have representatives from many aspects
concerned with the expansion but would be sworn to have an objective of making the
expansion work in the best interests of all factions. This can be done!!!! It has been done in
' other communities where conflicts have developed and successful resolutions have occurred
that were satisfactory compromises to all parties. Maybe even better ideas may occur.
Just think, actions that make something happen for the benefit of all parties might even lead to
better things happening for the entire community. Of course, this will take objectivity and compromise of
all concerned parties. Are we big enough in this area to have this happen, or a we so ingrained in our own
little worlds that we can't review, listen and understand everyone's viewpoint. We MUST understand the
other persons concerns but arrive at decisions that are satisfactory to all. This could be a new beginning
for the entire community in its relationships with each other and between businesses and individuals.
Do we all have the courage to make somethingeat out of this situation or will we continue to
l�
have each faction have its own story with no proper solution and only further animosity from all
viewpoints. Only each party involved can answer this extremely important question for the benefit of
everyone.
ISincerely,
Wm. 4J.Moo e
1 3-165
I ,
1 REi�E=IVED
TOWN OF Q SEENSBUPY
Pi ANNING OFFICE
1
Qv t t NS � ✓ �P� %�/ Q �v N ! �'! 9 /..1 e! a �- � �tr�7 �!!2 S
1 C/
7f►G e-eN��OPI�2!o�wGS �'X�tridreC• .�Z��G'�► �vaT�d�l�
�+� li�lr•/+�'i • ��I12S % Ul4�tiJVlr� DIQ zUN1n bUG�e�f bv� TTr
Q 7/er,qi-o7 L �vy�.loe-,* el f�tG�,�� / v�.e y .5��^2 0•a�
1 Gc �Uu� �� /oy� o�c a� .`o �/pa �vsi a N d� �•-c�.T �scc�e. .
1 %/V le, L 7 ".. mow'rl G�'/2 f� �t/l�iQ y �/ `�/ '� 'T lJlt L / �f� / �+�r ✓/�
�' a n -f , - ��`' .S ��T , Tfi [ v c fi 4 e� fit c r n� �'.,�'m �i✓�' 07` Cv •�-�,, •�� T� ���
I_/ le. s,�,« �p��. s /o�.c e, A ���C .S�Y'YVtrh�ii��'!
D�
1 r—� ul2/rl jiS m L.�Jc �a•✓G .St t �J 1-Y!a nJ ! C- a 7,,q e r
Cl12 a a-z- /ti Clv 6L
1 r
Tv w ��G fiive v c .e !�! •� w c� A'ooe,
2TC/OG�Paz �G�� T v fi 4 q.1
.� iV �tfAe- r71 f' e AfV W lv0� T`f� C uieivc.'Z . U., 7.-e 70't..,��—,�`�c�Y
L .Sewe-/( Ci/tG" eS d7`�-iie4�c��
re - l Ail�, le. I..,C- ble if d 0.44 9 7 c s �.
v�I, 7`"v 67o /4- 7`�r2 13?0S�o�o - �m.. ` vt OhJ elti
C ✓U v �v C3! j' i�.c._ �a mot` 'e-
i 4 t-C f t!. -¢ '/ L G� t'�fiC_ �G �✓L G✓�<e
1
3_166 �f G 1-6 e e -0 A-/" At c�
I
' (��% �• j t c.v�/o /•�� �w oz Cot, iv u�� Sc�cliin Noo ej- o�
G re- s. �' E,rc o/o G s N c w /�d ,s-le Otl Lei C211C . 142.s 6/4
' pi.J c-K Aevr.a�J
C�C
7 v� w�4� [ /[ G✓L/�a �� /.S�N � >t�re �, L CJ�C'U �� Oil
Jam! U G✓ /rG V C,4 /7'7 q /? a U ARh 2e- Gt .07 'a NN
�! i �� Gvc /� G cue �v 6 L' S v O✓ 2G�� G� ?Zj I / �7 � G N C � C� i f' iV CLJ
/E77QCC /, / "L �JJi�v�00s[� ZOU �♦ a�.ST/PO�/r/e Ct,Cc.��Z�
b u� 17` �a7`�a� iUai.s�
' �001��7�0..�, li v w C� N Gn�� �s���� s� ��v � /•e �c�
,may
,Snt•t /he-�l ,,-ee
Gcr.e7�J�JJ� �ChOlti /hC►�C` Zvi fi-pl/•!✓1 CUQ.STI� j�/vuj�/`�Ct/L
Gk- verP y S' Q�vJ �Cet�! T � r a� �v Cy��� G �i.S'v � �/��Oa ���ie ✓+'rt.
v - n 2r 1i 6 oiQ ,S� Oti 7 e—la-
n �OR0�4 b!/ N/NG�,p[.e [[�tJ�Q�Q L re
a
6lea,�711 s-uAI,tLT S �Cfiiti� l/uC.tT ��oa..��zi�J� itl G7 /'`L
S� J��ucJ eTr�. o �� vNs��� Z UU /''o/�•c �ac��c �/.r/C/ a �av`
A,o Ao/ f cTi v e- /rYtp4e7—
�� J�a/�Q T,-'a..-. �'� �.v�ic�a �a� �.2� �•e �4�t_ !ia/uni'e
l« alr 7-10
' A-) c �Tv L / P� 4 d- 7`— 7� �r a 1721 �J �J2 Y /n �� �v 4 �L
rT
oA.., � loeo 9' • T,1' .� s o � b'c e AJ G-I�'17 w ores c 4J/,Pt
3-167 /
wo A,e,,e' S Z-fr a&v e d a cj �-
70�1.v C TO Zj 1s.7—js
ce. cti 7tl4V,Pol.4oe .rG� �i4S /UeT�eCc/o 7Z��
Zf- CliaAvcC. 7--0 le Q'�.-sa..r 7 � 7—t
. v s o OPF •Z a z.4A.11 s V /a/ 4
' O 7"—' f -r- G.sue v u.j oe 4- ,o o11� X"z� 6/t N Z4 t de- G, o,K
—�a N T O6✓ rGT 71v/�
' ,fl c / Oh v'o /12' G�.f /O.V 57 CLl / - 4 AV C-L- . -G C,,z r
CA-1 G� �C G
% C U v .v �R aT %I eC v C _ �t c •V L X�O �'�+ ISCf e�� C_ ,pi- e a /C *"
Gr r a-7OZ /N � v c c .� s ��rP *,/ a/iv c -s-
e) T /,f ,,C- - le d o
�O L 074-�rPi 414 s &L n C �O w O .r O Gv .►.✓� � '41gs
' i�Of+i24s C- U+ 9 fi4 /-r Go2
t 74 me G It
' CZUCu,�enrh d
d r� p /
•y1 y (�,Joit �P /� .S �, �C aL � vt .f a.v
Ivim. G..��'G• •-� ��.� G,2ca7�`EscG�✓ L. Z� U E'TS.
0
C�Xe4� ti
3-168
' _Jk';T BY;.TNE CHA2EN COMPANIES; Sit M 2 2205; OCT-iB-00 11:26AM; PAGE 2111
'
CHAZEN ENGINEERING and LAND SURVEYING, INC.
North Country n ee:
copxarDubict (),(giae:
?00M: (518)-171-0929
'
110 Glen SMA
G1cm i'a11a, NY 12901
Ditcheu County O jiee:
ftno: (518) 912-0513
11hnne- (914) 434-3980
Far (319) A 12-2205
Orange County Ofjke-
'
wuw.claze wrip Iefi eom
Mw; (914) 3674 L33
' October 13, 2000
' Mr. Chris Round
Queensbury Development Director
' Queensbury Town Hall
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, New York 12804
Re. Comments on Great Escape DGEIS
' Job # 99920
Dear Chris:
' The following are our comments on the .Great Escape DGEIS. Please do not
hesitate to contact we with any questions or comments.
' A. Traihc
' Our comments closely mirror those of the DOT. All of the DOT's comments
should be considered substantive, and so do not require repeating here. In addition
to the points raised by the DOT, we have the following additional comments.
The applicant should propose a monitoring system for the alternative
mitigation measure triggering mechw.ism (i.e. tying traffic
' improvements to actual volumes, rather than attendance) suggested by
DOT-
' 2. Levels of Service and impacts should be discussed for special events.
For example, how are the traffic volumes and Levels of Service affected
when a special event such as an evening concert concluder?
'
3. Provide expanded discussion of traffic volumes and impacts on
da an xp
collector roads, specifically Gurney Lane, Glen Lake Road, West
' Mountain Road and Round Pond Road. For example, page 3-26 asserts
9VZ—J Z i/£0' d 61£-1 0810189819 3 —169 dnon vi- odi 1q*.£ i 00-81-100
' _RAT BY; THE CNAZEN COMPANIES; 51$ 812 2205; OCT-16-00 ii:27AU; PAGE 3111
Ur. t hrin Round
' Oelubor 13. 80D0
PApe 2
that existing traffic volumes an Glen Lake Road are low. This
statement should be substantiated and future impacts discussed.
' B.. Noise
1. Residents have asserted that the Alpine Bobsled was not running during
1 the October 29, 1999 sound level measurements- Is this assertion true?
2. Was the Alpine Bobsled running during the October 6, 1999 sound level
' measurements?
3. Discuss the potential sound impacts to Glen Lake residential receptors that
' do not have their line of site to the park blocked by topography. Do any such
receptors exist?
' 4. Describe the decibel levels that the applicant proposes to apply as the noise
thresholds for future rides (DGEIS page 4-23). How do tbem thresholds
compare to the existing sound levels at residential receptors? (liven that
' complaints have been made concerning rides such as the Alpine Bobsled,
that have unique noise signatures, yet which appear to fall within these
thresholds, how would the proposed thresholds serve to mitigate the
' impacts from such rides? Similarly, what sort of thresholds should apply to
so called "scream rides" designed to elicit high volume screams?
' 5. Describe the applicant's proposed noise monitoring program (DGEIS page 4-
28).
' G. Was the mitigation measure for amplified noise (Le. aiming speakers
inward to the Parr — DGEIS page 4.23) employed in 200fl? Did the Park
receive complaints about noise from amplifiers and speakers in 2000?
7- Discuss concert noise and mitigation. Were concerts held in 2000? If so,
were there complaints? Was the mitigation measure discussed at DGEIS
page 4-23 employed?
8. The applicant committed in the DGEIS to reduce Alpine Bobsled noise by 6
dBa (DGEIS page 3.44). Has this been accomplished? If not, what
additional mitigation measures are proposed?
9. Figure 4.10, Section A shows that the Northway will be above the line of
site to Glen Lake in the build condition (Northway elevation is 440'; parking
lot elevation is 432'). Given that approximately 200 feet of mature
coniferous vegetation are proposed to by removed, it is reasonable to expect
2.�pn}yca�frent L�tleYpa a899b�UCM1IB lottv�oac Let6ee.doc
9VZ-3 Z VVO'd 6L£-1 0810189819 3 —170 dn089 Vl-P1O81 Lb: £ 1 00-81-100
I
I
=NT BY,: THE CHAZEN COMPANIES; 518 8i2 2205; OCT-i9-00 ii:27AN; PAGE 4111
Mr. Ohris Round
Ociul*r 12, 2000
Page S
that there will be increased noise from the Northway experienced on Glen
Lake. This condition should be analyzed.
10. Figures 4-11 and 4-12 appear to show that residences on Glen Lake and in
Courthouse Estates would continue to be protected from Noxthway noise
because the intervening hill would remain. However, the sections have not
been caxxi.ed through to the actual residence locations to confirm this
conclusion. If residences are located at a svtMciently high elevation, a line of
site might exist and impacts result. The sections should be continued and
the findings discussed. If necessary, additional sections between the
Coachhouse Restaurant Exit 20 should be prepared.
11. Conduct the same DNL noise calculations provided for increased Northway
traffic at DGEIS pages 4-40141 to increased traffic on Rt. 9, using the
nearest residential receptors in the Tudcwood, Courthouse Estates and Glen
Lake neighborhoods.
C. Visual
1. We disagree with the conclusion that the potential visual impact of the 200
foot tall structure modeled "would not be significant" (DGEIS page 4-25).
Such a structure would clearly be visible within a large area. Depending on
its mass, color and form, the potential impacts could be quite significant.
We also note the potential for noise impacts from so called "scream aides"
elevated above the surrounding terrain. Absent further discussion of
mitigation, we anticipate recommending to the Planning Board that generic
approval not be given to a ride of the height modeled in the DGEIS, but that
any such elevated ride be subject to site specific site plan and SEQRA
approval.
Stormwater Manamment
1. Provide a discussion of the HydroCAD model (based on the DGEIS
appendices, HydroCAD was the software utilized) used to develop the
Stormwater Management Plan (SMP). This discussion will salt the
Planning Board in understanding how the proposed management system
works. It should include a basic idea of how the software works and a brief
description of each component of the model (i.e. subcatchments, ponds,
reaches and links). The sensitivity of the existing wetlands should be
addressed and correlated to the effects of the computer model results-
2. The SAW should include a discussion of the hydrologic and hydraulic
analysis that is conducted through FiydroCAD. The existing and proposed
Z \peu�ea�e\1,1�ae B"Ope 251220\11UOI$ Olrl"006 Laumukx
9bZ-J Zl/50.d 61£-1 08101898is 3-171 dlloa9 Yl-Viou LMI 00-81-130
7NT SY: THE CHAZEN COMPANIES; 5is 812 2205; OCT-18-00 1i:27AM; PAGE_ 5/11
Mr- Chris !found
OaoLor 13. 2000
Pegs 1
watershed conditions should be separately detailed to include: clear
' description of stormwater runoff patterns and any conveyance facilities;
location and description of on- or off -site discharge points; design points to
be used for comparison purposes should be located, described and called
' out; and the HydroCAD results for each storn event at each design point
should be tabulated.
I
3. Stormwater runoff is recognized as a major contributor of pollution that
can adversely affect the quality of receiving water bodies. The SW briefly
discusses stormwater quality. NYSDEC guidelines suggest that water
quality treatment facilities should be designed to control the first V2 inch
of runoff or runoff from the 1 year, 24 hour storm event, or whichever is
greater. Design details are needed to evaluate whether the removal
efficiencies claimed in the D{IEIS will be achieved-
4. The SMP should include a more detailed discussion of proposed erosion
and sediment control measures. This should include temporary erosion
and sediment control facilities that will be used clueing land clearing, land
grading and construction phases in addition to permanent erosion and
sediment control facilities with a schedule and maintenance plan. Details
should be provided to allow evaluation_
5. The SMP indicates that the 50 year, 24 hour, Type II storm event was
used as the design storm. NYSDEC guidelines suggest analyzing the
precipitation data for several return periods (i.e., the 1 year, 2 year, 10
year and 100 year storms for a 24 hour duration).
NYSDEC suggests the following design criteria for stormwater quantity
include the following:
a_ Storm drain system shall be designed to convey the 10 year, 24
hour. Free flow conditions (or backwater analysis) should be
discussed in addition to minimum and maximum flows and
discharge velocities.
b. Downstream -analysis of the 100 years, 24-hour event, including
peak discharge rates, total runoff volumes and evaluation of
impacts to receiving wators, wetlands and flood plains should be
discussed
c. Determining the storage volume and surface area requirements
necessary to provide flood control for runoff generated during a 2
year, 10 year and 100 year 24 hour storm events.
Z\grolea6%(:rent PbXdpe VVV30\D=2 f%MJL ud tatL-9lm
9VZ-3 Z i/90' d 61£-1 08 t 01898 t5 3 —172 d0089 VI-MONJ IV: £ t 00-8 t-100
NT BY: THE CHAZEN COMPANIES; Sig W 2 2205; OCT-A -00 11:28AM; PAGE 6/11
Mr. Chria Unund
October 19. 2000
paps
' d. Demonstrate that proposed facilities are capable of mitigating the
runoff from the 100-year storm event.
' The SUP should demonstrate compliance with these criteria,
6. The SUP should be expanded to include a detailed discussion of specific
site characteristics. Items that should be clearly defined are: soil
information including names, hydrologic groups, typical slopes, textures of
the soil and at what depths they typically occur, depth to the water table
' and depth to bedrock; topography of the area including the high and low
points, general direction and the range of slopes; whether or not the
wetlands are designated by USACOE or by the New York State
' Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC); a clear
description of the stream and associated classification that will receive the
stormwater runoff; whether or not the site falls within the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood plains; and rainfall data
for all of the storm events previously mentioned.
' 7. The SMP indicates the presents of Mnkley, Plainfield and Oakville type
soils, all of which are hydrologic soil Group A and are deep excessively
drained sandy soils. The USDA Soil Survey of Warren County, Panel 36
indicates the presents of Wareham (Wa) type soils along the northern side
of the existing stream that traverses the site. Wareham (Wa) soils are
hydrologic soil Group C and fore somewhat poorly drained to poorly
' drained soils. The stormwater model should be modified to reflect this
type of soil and the associative runoff coefficients,
' 8. The SNP states the following:
"The runoff will be directed through a series of drywells and detention basins
' to control and treat the first flush of runoff, infiltrate as much stormwater
back into the ground as possible, and reduce the peak rate of runoff to existing
■ levels."
a. NYSDEC guidelines suggest that water quality treatment facilities
' should be designed to control the first % inch of runoff or runoff from
the 1 year, 24 hour storm event, or whichever is greater. The SMP
should identify which design event was used.
' b. The SUP does not indicate if the proposed detention basins are dry
detention or extended detention. It must be noted that dry detention
' ponds provide few, if any water quality benefits and therefore, this
practice should not be used as a substitute for water quality
yxW�CheatExrps6900\1DIMSUtUT ILLetar.dm
9VZ-3 Z1/10'd 61£-1 0810189819 3-173 dnob9 vi- OSA 8Mt 00-81-100
NT BY:, THE CHAZEN COMPANIES; 518 812 2205; OCT-18-00 ii:28AM; PAGE_7/ii
Mr. Chris Round
(7otobar 13, 2000
' Pero V
' treatment practices such as infiltration, retention or extended
detention.
' c. The proposed improvements include several detention basins that
will be used for groundwater recharge. Since these basins will be
used as temporary storage of runoff, provide calculations that
demonstrate the basins recovery time for the 50-year event.
d. Mapping provided as part of the SMP suggest two proposed detention
ponds adjacent to the existing stream and wetlands. Based on a
review of the soil survey, they may be located within a soil with low
permeability and depths to groundwater at 0 to 1.5 feet below the
'
ground surface. Provide the necessary calculations that demonstrate
that these proposed ponds will provide the necessary storage and
recharge given the possibility that they may be located in type C soil
and groundwater may be shallow. In addition, if the proposed
detention basins are in fact located within 'Type C soil- and
groundwater is at such shallow depths, will these basins be
'
constructed with a minimum of two feet of separation between the
lowest ground elevation within the basin and the seasonal high
groundwater elevation. Demonstrate that these criteria will be met.
9. The SMP briefly discusses a "design paint" as being an existing stream. The
design point should be identified under Existing Conditions and expanded
'
upon under Proposed Conditions. The discussion should include tables
demonstrating existing and proposed runoff to the stream and the resulting
stream velocities at various return periods. Describe how these outfall
tconditions
correlate to stream depths under various return periods.
'
10. -Based on the calculations provided, it appears that the base flow of the
existing stream was not accounted for as part of the hydraulic analysis. This
should include the existing stream geometry and upland areas that drain to it.
'
11. The SMP states the following:
"fine system moderates the velocity and volume of stormwater to levels that
are similar to existing conditions."
Provide a brief summary of the findings that support this statement.
12. Summaries of the stormwater design are included within the Calculations
' provide. Provide also include summaries at various storm events that can
I
ZA1*4wbu\GnatCx^W9002W,I)VOI0ammmanh1, Am
1 9VZ-d Z l 80' d 61£-1 0810189819 3 -174 dnon vi-mosi W £ 1 00-81-100
' _NT BY: THE CHAZEN COMPANIES; sia 8i2 2POS; OCT-is-00 11:28AM; PAGI-8/ii
Mr. chria Kuuud
Oetr+bLe li, Z000
Page 7
' easily correlate existing and proposed stormwater conditions within the
body of the report:
a. Peak flow comparisons for the 2, 10, 60 and 100-year storm events.
b. Peak volume comparison for the 2, 10, 50 and 100-year storm events_
c. Design summaries of each detention pond including pond depths at
the 10, 50 and 100-year storm events relative to each pond's flood
elevation. Also, demonstrate each pond has adequate recovery time
for the 50-year storm event.
' d. Comparison of pre and post stormwater quality correlated to any
proposed stormwater management facilities.
13.The pre development data provided includes only summary sheets. Include
the detailed information for the pre development model similar to the- post
development data provided.
' The summary sheets provided for the subcatchment areas for pre and post
14. Y
development indicate that the pre development watershed areas total 68.91
acres, while post development watershed areas total 60.96 acres. Explain the
reason for the difference in pre and post development watershed areas.
15. The post development model shows data for the existing wetlands that will
remain, however it appears that the pre development model does not
account for them. How will the impacts of stormwater quantity on the
twetlands be evaluated? Clarify how stormwater quantity will impact the
existing wetlands.
16. The post development model accounts for exfiltration rages of 0.1 to 0.2
CFS. Provide documentation that validates the exfiltrati.on rates used.
17.The post development data indicates that as many as 12 ponds,
representing dryweils, detention basins and wetlands flood. In some
instances, the floodixig is greater than 1 foot above flood elevations (see
summary below).
$:�yeujeeU�C,lroAt Fanxps ~\=]US c un" L 01r."ko
I9VZ-j Zl 60'd 61£-1 081018581E 3-175 dnon vl- uj WEI 00-81-100
I
11
_NT BY: THE CHAZEN COMPANIES;
Mr. Chris Ruund
oct fiber 38, 2000
Pago S
5i8 W 2 2205; OCT-iA-00 11:20AM;
Post Development Part B:
Pond 101, 3.3' above flood elevation
Pond 122, 2.6' above flood elevation
Pond 123, 2.0' above flood elevation
Pond 127, 2.1' above flood elevation
Post Development Part C:
Pond 3, 1.4' above flood elevation
Pond 17, 5.6' above flood elevation
Pond 28, 3.T above flood elevation
Pond 34, 3.1' above flood elevation
PAGE 9111
With the magnitude of flooding occurring at the 50-year storm event how will
the proposed drainage system properly convey runoff without adversely
effecting the proposed improvements?
18.1t appears that two copies of Part C of the post development model have
been included, 31 Jan 00 and 18 May 00. Which model is correct?
19.Pond 4 from Part C, 31 Jan 00 poet development model is not described and
Pond 19 from both Part C models is not described. Provide the design
information for these elements.
20.How would the use of a porous material (e.g. gravel or porous blocks) affect
the stormwater management system proposed? Would there be greater or
lesser runoff? Greater or fewer management facilities? What impact would
the use of such materials have on the overall quantity and quality of
stormwater ultimately discharged to the Glen Lake system?
21. Did the SUNOM model used to assess impacts from runoff include runoff.
from Park Area A?
D. Sewage Tre tment
1. Provide the distance between the edge of the proposed leach field and the
top of bank of the adjacent wetland. Provide the distance to the bottom of
the bank. Provide the distance to the edge of the wetland.
2. Discuss the use of alternatve sites under the control of the Great Escape for
the discharge of treated wastewater.
' Z1pee�eeew Gcsa. Eecayu 9992o�1xES8 Cpnh+ye Trwm.doe
1 3-176
9VZ-1 Zl/01'd 6!£-1 081028981 df1089 VI-WOSd 6V:U 00-81-100
' ,-NT BY: THE CHAZEN COMPANIES; 5i8 812 2205; OCT-18-00 1i:29AM; PAGE 10/11
Mr. Chris Round
CAKober 13, 20011
Fage 9
3. Reconcile the apparent discrepancy between the increase in attendance of
about 70% (900,090 to 1,500,000) and the increase in projected sewage flow
of about 33% (45,000 gpd to 60,000 gpd) from the Park.
G'
4. The DGEIS asserts their will be no impact on Glen Lake from Additional
phosphorous loading from the Park, but no evidence such as modeling is
provided to support this assertion. Provide such evidence.
5. Discuss alternative treatment technologies or designs that would improve
discharge effluent quality over that proposed to be met (see DGEIS page 2-
14)? Describe the costs and benefits of meeting such standards.
E. Gradina
1. Provide full size grading plans for review.
2. Provide the total amount of cut and fill proposed.
3. The DGEIS states that the average grade reduction in Area C is five feet.
What is the maximum grade reduction proposed?
4. Discuss the amount of fill proposed for the parking areas. How will this fill
function in terms of stormwater detention and retention?
5. DGEIS page 4-22 states "The hillside grades will be changed to between 0
and 10' ". Clarify the meaning of this statement, Does it mean that a 10'
reduction in the hill is proposed?
F. LighUaz
The draft Queensbury zoning ordinance proposes a maximum light fixture
height of 20 feet and a uniformity ratio of 4.1. The DGEIS proposes 50 foot tall
fixtures with a uniformity ratio of 10:1. In our opinion the very tall parking lot
lights proposed will be quite visible and will have a significant iin►pact. Discuss
the impacts of, and the Park's position with respect to, utilization of lower
fixtures.
1. Provide a general discussion of the type and volume of induced growth in
the Rt. 9 corridor likely to result if the municipal sewer were extended to
the Great Escape-
G +txcjacU\OCcot FXSV8 9PE30�i�(:Lrl!? CtknMMriL t ang hr.
9kZ-d Z l/ l t ' d 61£-1 0810185815 3 —177 dnON9 V7-WOal WE[ [ 00-81-100
' _NT BY; THE CHA2EN COMPANIES; Sig V 2 2206; CCT-18-00 ii:29AM; PAGE ii/ii
Mr. Ohris Round
(October 13. 20M
' Page 10
2. The DGEIS states that the applicant is opposed to the use of gravel lots
because it willslow the filling of spaces by patrons. While perhaps true, this
is the current situation, and observation would lead to the conclusion that it
:is not unacceptable to the population at large. Given the large amount of
pavement (and associated stormwater management measures proposed),
the applicant should present additional evidence or make a better case that
paving the parking areas is a requirement for successful operation of the
' business.
3. The proposed 10 foot buffers along the Northway will, in our opinion,
provide little meaningful screening, visual or otherwise.
4. DGEIS page 2-3 states that the Park is open into the evening about 25 days
out of every season. Is this intended as a statement of policy with respect to
future operations?
t5. Provide a large scale USGS topographic map that shows the location --of all
of the line of site profiles contained in the DGEIS. The map should
illustrate the starting and ending point of each profile.
Sincerely,
11
cc: Dean Long
John Lemery
John Collins
Z'.prjjevtn\+r&ac E-%MPa MH%9NDUk18 (k=4 ont 1,ntW,E1X
Stuart F. Mesinger, AICP
Director
H
9VZ-d Z1/Z1'd 61£-1 0810199819
3-178
dnon vl- odi W£1 00-81-D0
I
I
Queensbury Planning Board
Bay Road
Queensbury,NY
To all Planning Board members:
b L0"D
T ''AA (ter'
1 �4'�1'v 0, �n.lv...LF
PiLANNI
I respectfully submit the following comments in regard to the proposed expansion
of the Great Escape. I am presently a seasonal resident of Birdsall Road with
future plans of becoming a full time resident.
Sewer and Stormwater- Protection of surface water and groundwater quality is
of paramount importance to Glen Lake.
Northway noise -The present existing land form between I-87 and Route 9
provides an important sound barrier to reduce Northway noise toward -'the
east.Any parking development in this corridor must at minimum incorporate
similar sound alleviation benefits.
Amusement park noise -Construction of the 23 lot subdivision at Round Pond
and Birdsall Roads has provided a sound corridor from the park toward the
homes to the east. The existing undeveloped hill owned by John Whalen
provides an essential visual and auditory buffer for residents of Glen Lake.
This buffer must be maintained. To insure preservation the town should -
require that the park purchase all or the ridge portion of this hill to be
preserved with no cutting and no grading for a perpetual buffer.
Hours of Operation- The noise from the bobsled ride is ever present and
annoying but loud music and Christian Rock until midnight is purely
unacceptable. I formally request the board limit the hours of music and loud
entertainment.
The majority of jobs created by the Great Escape expansion are seasonal low
paying jobs. Though I realize the town wants to encourage increased
employment opportunities, I think it is important to do so without threatening
the quality of life of local residents. Thank you for working to make choices
that will enhance life in Queensbury.
S' cerely
i" Linda Whittle
3-179
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
742 Bay Road, Queensbury, NY 12804-5902 518-761-8201
TO: John Lemery
FROM: Chris Round
DATE: October 30, 2000
RE: Comments on DGEIS for the Great Escape Received from 10/18 to 10/27/00
Please find comments received on the Great Escape DGEIS from 10/18 to 10/27/00.
CR/pw
3-180
"HOME OF NATURAL BEAUTY ... A GOOD PLACE TO LIVE"
SETTLED 1763
1
H
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
742 Bay Road. Queensbury. NY 12804-5902 518-761-8201
Comments on the Great Escape DGEIS
Received 10/18 thru 10/2 .7
10/27/00
Joanne Bramley
10/27/00
Thomas Hall, DEC
10/27/00
Rec'd. - Ben Fowler
10/27/00
Rec'd. - Richard Nicholson
10/27/00
Glen Lake Protective Association / Officers & Board of Directors
10/27/00
Karen Sabo
10/26/00
M/M Dana S. Bray, Jr.
10/26/00
Anna Fowler
10/25/00
John Crawford
10/25/00
Betty A. Spadano
10/25/00
Diane Hayes
10/25/00
Roger Boor
10/25/00
James G. O'Keefe. M.D.
Y0125100
Dr. & Mrs. Hyung R. Kim
10/25/00
Tor & Christine Haggblom
10/25/00
Donald P. Sipp
10/24/00
Rec'd. E. P. Choppa , Mrs. Eugene Choppa, Sr.
10/24/00
Dr. & Mrs. Ronald Van Slooten
10/24/00
Norman Enhoming
'10/24/0
Rec'd. Jeanne S. Sullivan
10/24/00
Rec'd, Mr. E. P. Hunt
10/24/00
Rec'd, Mrs. Dorothy B. Hunt
10/24/00
Robert & Anne Clark
10/24/00
Citizens for Queensbury , Roger Boor / Vice-Pres.
10/24/00
David L. Paddock
10//24/00
Helen P. Stern
10//23100
Robert DiDio
10/23/00
Robert J. Sullivan
10/23/00
Marian Cornell.
10/23/00
Paul Sheehan
10/23/00
Roger A. Ryan
10/23/00
Charles & Lee York
10/23/00
Linda Clark Whitty
10/23/00
Mary C. Hilliard
10/23/00
Suzanne Delman
10/22/00
Paul Derby
10/22/00
John R. Buchanan
10/22/00
Lorraine Stein
3-181
"HOb1E OF NATURAL BEAI.`TY ....A GOOD PLACE TO LIVE"
SETTLED 1763
10/22/00
Elizabeth Galloway
10/22/00
Robert H. Vannier
10/22/00
Michael Guido, M.D.
10/22/00
Glenn & Regina Powell
10/21/00
Raymond & Joan Erb
10/20/00
Karen C. Angleson
10/19/00
Robert C. Greene
10/17/00
Ms. Aileen Kane
10/17/00
Qu. Environmental Advisory Board members: R. Huntz, D. Roberts, G.
Stec, L. White
9/6/00
Rec'd 10/25/00, Edward Schadwill, Sr.
5/22/00
Rec'd. 10/25/00, Susie Washburn
3-182
_ --_- MEMORANDUM
t TO: Queensbury Town Board DATE: October 17,200
FROM: Queensbury Environmental Issues Advisory Committee
SUBJECT: Great Escape DGEIS Comments
1 Members of the Queensbury Environmental Issues Advisory Committee have reviewed the Draft
Generic Environmental Impact Statement (DGEIS) for the Great Escape theme park proposed
expansion located on Route 9 in the Town of Queensbury. The committee provides the following
comments for consideration of the Board in review of this project.
I
VISUAL IMPACTS
Consideration of visible impacts should not be limited to the close proximity of the park as
illustrated in the DGEIS. In volume I, page iv, paragraph 4, the statement is made "while
virtually all modified development in the existing established area of the park (Park Area
"A"), will not be visible from outside the park, this DGEIS also studies the potential for new
attractions such as rides to create visual impacts." Residences as far as two miles from the
park and can clearly see 6 rides protruding above the trees already. Additional rides at or
above these levels should be avoided as they are visually dominant in an otherwise
undisturbed landscape from many viewpoints.
A major visual impact (and potential environmental impact) of the proposed expansion will
be the construction of the large parking facilities in Area C, increasing the parking from 2,600
spaces to 4,000 spaces. The need for this parking is unclear from a total park use perspective.
Currently, the existing parking allows for crowds in the park that frequently result in lines of
more than 1 hour at most of the popular rides/shows. Consequently, the park under existing
build -out seems near capacity. If the number of activities within the park is not expanded by
2-fold, then it seems unnecessary to nearly double the parking capacity. It does not seem
reasonable to assume that without considerable increase in facilities within the park, crowds
warranting the extensive parking proposed are going to turn out to wait in two -hour-long
lines. The total amount of proposed parking should be phased in over a period of years based
on the project use related to'expansion of Park attractions.
tTRAFFIC/PARKING
Section 5, page 5-1 states that the proposed loss of vegetation is unavoidable. Some of the
loss of the proposed 11.5 acres of forest could be reasonably avoided and more thoroughly
mitigated. Figure 4-1 shows that all of the mature trees/shrubs will be removed along the
Page 1 of 7
3-183
' Northway right-of-way to accommodate the expanded parking. The proposed plantings in
figure 2-4 appear to be insufficient to provide a visual barrier from the Northway or from
Route 9. Since the amount of parking is in excess of what seems to be reasonably needed for
the park facilities (see comment above), the width of the buffer along the Northway should
be increased and some of the large mature trees left in place. In addition. the planting scheme
should be sufficient to ensure the view of the massive paved parking area is fully mitigated
from both major roadways. This should include a monitoring plan for the plantings, and a
commitment to ensure survival or replanting of trees and shrubs for 3 years after planting.
The composition of the landscape materials should be native species instead of ornamentals,
' wherever possible.
The proposal to use excess soil from grading to increase the height of the land along the
Northway may assist in providing a visual barrier. However, details of this plan were not
r provided. The potential negative impacts of this proposal of fill inclose proximity to wetlands
and the effect on the stormwater management should be addressed. The potential for keeping
mature trees in the existing buffer along the Northway would have significantly less
environmental impacts than a grading plan to dispose of soil in this area in a way that would
require removal of all existing vegetation.
' A parking garage would seem a very viable alternative. There would be a huge reduction in
pavement, vegetative removal. and consequently storm -water runoff. If a convention center is
1 to be built, this parking garage could better service the patrons and would be utilized year
round. The snow removal operation would be greatly reduced by such a plan.
' SURFACE WATERS/WETLANDS IMPACTS
The DGEIS concludes that there will be no significant long-term cumulative effects on
aquatic ecology. The information provided is insufficient to support this statement. Potential
contributions to surface water degradation include stormwater run-off, wastewater discharge
! and to a lesser extent, waterfowl use. The potential for long-term degradation of water quality
from nutrient loading resulting from the watstewater discharge is addressed in the next
comment. The stormwater plan provides detailed information on how the quantity of
stormwater will be treated in order to remain at or below existing conditions. However, the
DGEIS does not address stormwater quality. The discharge of the stormwater goes to
sensitive aquatic systems and data to support the contention that there will not be long-term
degradation of surface water quality resulting from the significant increase in impervious
surfaces proposed by the project needs to be presented. Due to the seasonal operation of the
Park, alternative surfaces could be used to increase permeability in parking areas that will not
need to be plowed in the winter. The DGEIS should address decreasing the impermeable
surfaces as an alternative that would decrease the potential for significant surface water
quality impacts resulting from stormwater runoff from the parking areas. The other
alternative that is more favorable for stormwater
An existing condition within the park that adds to degradation of water quality is the presence
t
Page 2 of 7
' 3-184
of waterfowl within the main stream. Populations of waterfowl may also utilize the proposed
stormwater ponds. As mitigation for potential water quality impacts, the Great Escape should
implement low-cost measure to manage the water fowl populations. Allowing vegetation to
grow along the bank of the stream, fencing and. in particular, signage discouraging the guests
from feeding the ducks, should be used to discourage the large resident population from over-
use of this section of the stream Water fowl are notorious for increasing nutrient and coliform
contamination in surface water and a proper management program should be implemented
An education program with simple signs requesting the guests not to feed the ducks would be
beneficial along the existing restaurant facilities near Subway and Itza Pizzeria.
'
The pedestrian bridge and or tunnel are good and necessary alternatives to move people across
Route 9. For the safety of the visitor this needs to be done no matter what the outcome of the
expansion is. Bike and pedestrian traffic need to have better access and extending the bike
path would offer a safer place in which to travel. The idea of parking fees and tollbooths
would not be recommended. Since there is such a high volume of traffic in such a short
amount of time this would defeat the purpose of good traffic flow and make for a much
happier customer. Increase the ticket prices or charge at the main gate in lieu of the
tollbooths. Staffing the tollbooths would be expensive and would add a great deal of
complexity to the operation. An access road off of Route 9 would alleviate traffic congestion
and is probably a better alternative than widening Route 9. facility.
' The sheer volume of paved parking area, for a limited time per year, goes beyond the
threshold of what that land can carry. The storm -water runoff would be significant,
particularly with the removal of a vast majority of the existing vegetation. There are no
specifics given for the type of drywells and detention basins to be used. Certainly, with this
magnitude of parking area, oil and grid chambers would be used. Voltechnics would be a
good choice. They were used by the recent Target Distribution center in Wilton. Again, there
' is no mention on the adverse affects to the wetland from this runoff, nor of the contaminants
of heavy metals etc. that might be in the runoff. If there is to be expansion and improvement
the number of parking spaces needs to be mitigated.
'
WASTEWATER DISPOSAL
Page 3-4 states that no activities will involve or intercept with groundwater resources.
However, the document also states that the high groundwater table is within 6 feet of the
!
surface during parts of the year. In addition, page 2-14 indicates that the effluent from the
preferred wastewater treatment alternative will be discharged to a deep sandy soil, which will
further reduce nutrient pollution to the regional groundwater system. The design flows for the
wastewater treatment system are up to 95,000 GPD (gallons per day). The treated effluent
limit for total phosphorus (the nutrient with the greatest potential for contamination of surface
water) is 0.5 mg/L. The surface water concentrations of total phosphorous in the surrounding
'
wetlands and the final receiving waters of Glen Lake are 1 to 2 orders of magnitude less than
this effluent concentration. The surface water concentrations of total phosphorus (TP) in
1
tributaries to Glen Lake range from 0.009 to 0.040 mg/L TP. Unless the separation from the
groundwater and ultimate discharge to surface water is capable of continuously removing a
IPage 3 of 7
3-185
I
substantial load of TP from the effluent, indefinitely, during all flow conditions, a potential for
' significant impact to water quality exists. The DGEIS does not provide sufficient information
regarding the groundwater or soil conditions, or the proposed wastewater disposal system in
section 2.1.10 or Appendix 6 to support the statement that ground water or surface water will
' not be impacted by the proposed discharge.
The use of the type of small plant proposed, with relatively high quality effluent capabilities,
' may not result in significant water quality impacts in the short-term. However, concern is the
degradation of the groundwater, and ultimate receiving water quality over many years of
' operation, when the capacity of the sandy soils to remove nutrients may become over -loaded.
Mitigation for this long-term impact may be achieved by having the SPDES permit for the
plant limited to a discreet time period (3-5 years) and making the permit non-renewable. This
should be considered as an alternative in the DGEIS. Prior to the permit expiration,
alternatives, such as connecting to municipal sewer should be reconsidered, and the operation
and impacts of the system should be re-evaluated.
1 A major issue in the wastewater treatment proposal is the lack of resolution of the potential
for municipal sewer to serve the Park. The DGEIS should not be finalized until the Town's
sewer study is complete. There is a regional sewage treatment plant in the City of Glens Falls
'
and a sewer line within a few miles of the park. Connecting into this municipal system is
must be considered.
'
The DGEIS assumes that the operation and maintenance of the facility will continuously
allow attainment of high quality effluent standards. The potential for short-term impacts due
to operational difficulties should be considered.
The water used on site is withdrawn from the Hudson River, supplied by the Town of
'
Queensbury. The discharge of the wastewater out -of -basin, to Halfway Brook should be
addressed.
'
NOISE
Impacts to the adjoining residential communities must be minimized in order to prevent
'
having their current quality of life compromised by increased noise both during the day and
night and over a longer period of time by an extended season. Mitigation should include
shorter hours of the day and a shorter season.
ECONOMIC IMPACTS
1 The positive economic benefits stated in the DGEIS are countered by negative impacts on
residential property values. In addition, taxpayers in the Queensbury School district will not
directly benefit from the portion of the proposed park expansion that within the Lake George
' School District. The sales tax on a $33.00 ticket is 0.6% - not the 7% that the DGEIS
r implies.
' The need for a second convention center if the one in Lake George is built, must be addressed.
IPage 4 of 7
' 3-186
f
' BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES
In volume 1, page iv, paragraph 3, there is a statement that reads, "No protected species of
plants or animals exist on the site." In same volume page 3-5, paragraph 5, the first sentence
states table 3-2 "Flora of the Great Escape Lands East of Interstate 87," lists the scientific and
common names of all plants identified growing in Park Areas A and C." On page 3-10, there
'
appears in this list wild lupine, scientific name, Lupinus perennis. This plant "is the only
known food plant for the larvae" of the Kamer Blue butterfly (Lycaeides melissa samuelis), an
J
endangered species.
In volume 3 of the DGEIS in "appendix 5, Letters of Record," there is a letter from the U.S.
Department of the Interior dated January 11, 2000, and addressed to Dr. Richard P. Futyima
'
of the LA group. That letter deals with the endangered species the Kamer Blue butterfly. I
quote paragraph 5. "An evolution of existing habitat at the respective project sites, and its
'
potential to support the Kamer Blue butterfly or wild lupine, should be completed. If the
evolution indicates that the site has the potential to support the Kamer Blue butterfly or its
habitat, the site should be surveyed by a qualified person to determine the presence or absence
'
of this species." According to your biological surveys, lupine grows in Park Areas A and C.
The potential fro Kamer Blue habitat must be further evaluated and discussed.
' The following paragraph in the letter states "the respective projects environmental documents
should identify any direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts on the Kamer Blue butterfly or its
habitat, and include appropriate measures if necessary, to protect this species and its habitat."
t The letter states that the information gathered should be forwarded to its office for evaluation
for its potential impact on the Kamer Blue butterfly or its habitat to "determine the need for
further consultation pursuant Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act." Evidence of these
' studies is not presented in the report.
There is on file in the planning department of the Town of Queensbury a report prepared by
'
Michael S. Batcher, M.S., consulting Ecological and Environmental Planner. The report was
prepared March 15, 1998, and is entitled, Report on 1997 Survey for Lupine (Lupinus
perennis) Sites and Karner Blue butterfly (Lycaeides melissa samuelis) Populations In The
'
Town of Queensbury, Warren County, New York. In this report there are six (6), lupine sites
that have been identified and mapped that basically encircle the Great Escape's properties.
Site No. 1, is located on Rt. 9 on tax I.D. parcel #74-1-8, which is the Samoset property
'
owned by the Great Escape and scheduled for development as part of Park Area C. Site No.
4, identified as the "I87 North site" is located in Park Area B owned by the Great Escape.
'
These two sites alone, not to mention the other 4 sites are examples and proof enough that the
whole land holdings constituting the Great Escape Park should be resurveyed to locate and
identify the lupine plant. Within the last 5 years or so, Park Area C, the proposed site for the
parks expansion has been heavily logged thus improving the site for the expansion of the
'
lupine plant habitat. This logging and the time elapsed since it was done has made this area
conducive to the expansion of the lupine habitat. This emphasize the need for a reevaluation
and/or survey of the site. Results of such a survey should be presented along with comments
'
from the N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation regarding the habitat issue and
_r
Page 5 of 7
' 3-187
potential impacts of the proposed action.
Pertaining to Wildlife section 3.2.3., paragraph 1 states, "A list of wildlife species observed on
site, in addition to those which could potentially inhabit the site due to their regional
occurrence and habitat preference, is presented in Table 3-3 "Potential Wildlife Occurring on
the Great Escape Properties." It should be clarified how the surveys were conducted and
which speices were observed during the current field studies.
There is in the Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) section "l82.6 endangered species,
threatened species and species of special concern." The list has Molluscs, Fishes,
Amphibians, Reptiles, Birds and Mammals. It is not just limited to birds, mammals and
reptiles as is indicated on "Table 3-3 Potential Wildlife Occurring on the Great Escape
Properties." In the DEC list of "species of special concern" there appears 3 amphibians, one
reptile and 3 birds that also appear in Table 3-3. These are the Jefferson salamander, Blue -
spotted salamander, and Spotted salamander, all Amphibians. Also, the Wood turtle, a reptile
and the common barn -owl, common night hawk and the Eastern bluebird are listed as
occurring or potentially occurring on the site. On the DEC list of "Endangered Species," is
listed the insect Kamer Blue butterfly, discussed previously.
On page 3-11, at the bottom of the page the last sentence states, "No rare, threatened or
endangered wildlife species are known to exist on the site nor were any observed by L.A.
Group biologist." This statement should be clarified with respect to those species of special
concern listed as potentially occurring on the site. Since the park is situated in a
"geographical bowl," a lot of these construction and earth moving activities will have the
potential to indirectly infringe into the waterways. Potential impacts of the habitat alteration
or habitat loss should be addressed.
ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
The fact that there are such significant archeological sites in the area should be an asset to the
town. The sites that were located on the Indian Ridge property could very easily be associated
with these new sites. Instead of once again paving over an important site, a creative way to
preserve and interpret these sites would be of greater benefit to the community, visitors, and
for the generations to come. To erase history for the sake of parking lots is unjustified.
When will the Phase II archeological investigation take place if it is deemed
necessary to impact the sites? With 84 STP'S over a 20 acre parcel, a phase II will
offer so much more data, for both the Holtz Terrace and the Kenney Terrace sites. But
will they do the investigations? What will happen to these sites, especially if they are
eligible for National. -Register Status?
Where will the artifacts be placed that have already been recovered and the additional
ones yet to be recovered? Do the artifacts belong to The Great Escape, to the Town or
the State of New York? Will they ever be made available for public exhibition and
interpretation?
Preserving the sites should be given due consideration rather than the alternative of a
Page 6 of 7
3-188
r
Data Retrieval Investigation.
Can easements of some type be had of these sites rather than risk their demolition?
Is not Heritage Tourism being promoted in the community — what an opportunity!
• ' We request that our comments be forwarded to the Planning Board.
Submitted by Queensbury Environmental Advisory Board Members:
Robert Huntz
Deborah Roberts
George Stec
Linda White
cc: C. Round
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Page 7 of 7
3-189
f:
I 9000
' OJ ll i iL Li', -
Ifhd C':
ao
i
Cl
3-191
3-192
Town of Queensbury Planning Board
RE: Great Escape Expansion
Published newspaper reports tell of numerous local residents who are opposed to the
expansion of the Great Escape. They are claiming that is may destroy the three nearby
neighborhoods.
The attitude of some people seems to be as if everything on this earth should be
removed. back to nature, except for their own house. However as the population of the
world increases there must also be increases in almost everything associated with people,
tthis includes businesses and highway traffic.
'
Traffic statistics are that for several decades the number of vehicles on the roads
doubles every ten years. I can remember the congestion in Glens Falls before the
northway bypass was built several years ahead of the northway ' s completion to 1967. It
was reported that up to a two hour delay was encountered to go north thru Glens Falls
'
during the summer weekends. In this time before the completion of the northway , in
summer months , I repeatedly used route 9N thru Corinth and I also found roads to avoid
Saratoga and Schenectady to go to Albany and then points south via the NY thruway.
Many years ago before the Glens Falls bypass was opened, route 9 in the area of Great
Escape to the city was well used by automobiles and trucks. After the bypass was opened
in the middle of the day that portion of route 9 was almost deserted, many times seeing
only two or three vehicles in the couple of long straight sections of route 9 near Great
Escape. Now thirty years later traffic has become sizeable.
A special exit from the northway for Great Escape would not be allowed by the
interstate regulations. These prohibit exits to a private business. One might soon think o t
the exit to Crossgate Mall from the northway, but when you observe the 0 mile marker in
the middle of the 190 bridge, it then becomes obvious that the interstate ends at the 190
'
bridge and the extension to Western Ave. is a state highway.
The congestion at the traffic light near the south end of the miracle one half mile is a
design problem that will only get worse, until the roads are widened or the heavy crossing;
traffic is eliminated. The overall remedy aiding Glens Falls congestion also is the
building of an interstate style highway from Fairhaven VT to exit 17 as exit 20 does not
have open space for the intersection's needs. Traffic congestion in the NYC area is very
bad and worse when there is a transit strike, making congestion in this area as
'
insignificant.
Six Flags Darien Lake is located on a single road some what similar to route 9N going
g
to Lake Luzerne perhaps as if at Lake Vainer. Reports recently obtained are that peak
'
daily crowds at Darien Lake are around fifty percent higher than those of Great Escape.
The nearest high volume highway, the NY thruway, is nearly ten miles away to an exit.
A good road is three miles the other way.
1
3-193
However when a person travels past Six Flags new england in Agawam. Mass. they
will go for over two miles along a two lane road with houses similar to Ridge Road either
side of Quaker Road on the north side of the park. The south side has about one half mile
similar, the state line and five more miles with very few buildings to a high volume road.
The peak daily attendance of Six Flags new england is reported to be over twice that of
Great Escape.
Therefore the objections to stop the expansions because of increased traffic is about
like a coyote howling at the moon as it is going to happen regardless of Great Escape's
expansion unless there is a drastic change of living.
I have seen residential areas that had been used by daily commuters as bypasses to
paralleling congested roads have installed permanent blockages in the middle of each
block making a multitude of dead end streets to eliminate thru traffic. Most tourists
would not look for alternate roads to avoid congestion.
When rebuilding rt. 9 over ten years ago and not making it a four lane highway, I
'
consider the planning of New York State highways as going backwards towards the old
horse and buggy days. That is another large subject.
Great Escape as Storytown was built in the mid 50's before the building of most of the
houses of the nearby residential areas. In general all cities in the world expand outwards
'
into the surrounding rural areas so if a person wants the solitude of nothing around them
along with neglible traffic on their highway, they made the wrong choice to locate near
any city. Instead these quiet lovers should have located in a remote area such as five
'
miles to the west of Stony Creek on that twelve mile dead end road which may never be
reactivated for thru traffic to Wells.
As to noise, I have talked to managers of Great Escape and know concern is being
aimed to quieting a noisy ride even myself offering some suggestions that could be easily
tried. However if a person parked a vehicle in front of your home with a backup beeper
going that emits irritating blasts which can be heard for several miles them objections are
in order. Required navigational horn blasts from the large sightseeing boats of Lake
George can be heard over five miles away even over mountains.
As to lake water pollution if my memory serves me correctly from Lake George sewer
system discussions, there are regulations opposing the robbing of a water shed by
pumping sewerage into another water shed. Road and parking lot runoff pollution is a
subject of new federal regulations due to be in effect next year according to a Post Star
'
article of Sept. 4, 2000. A half mile south of Great Escape at rt9 and Montray road is a
collecting pit.
There is a controllable pollution where the highway departments use salt. There are
areas of low salt use seeming to be near a water supply reservoir. Other environmentally
friendly substitutes are available or as some western states use nothing added to melt
' snow and ice, just traveling slower on snow and ice with sand only.
1
3-194
H
1
I would dispute the environmentalists claim of run off water causing a high percentage (80) of
the polution (PS Sept. 4) as there are many warm blooded and cold blooded animals discharging
their wastes directly into the waterways. These animals would include ducks, geese, terns,
muskrats and beavers as well as occasional water animals as racoons, mink otters and numerous
water marsh birds in addition are fish, turtles and a multitude of small water creatures.
One only has to remember that several years ago the state swimming beach at Lake George
was closed several times due to high polution caused by the discharges from a flock of terns.
Lake George in that area at the southern end of the lake has had a sewer system in operation i or
several decades. Lake George water in general is fit for drinking being chlorinated and soon to
be filtered for public supplies of the village of Lake George and Ticonderoga but untreated for
thousands of shore line homes, a rare occurance in this world.
The bacterial level allowable for swimming is much greater than that for drinking water, } et a
few relatively small birds did create this high polution at Lake George State Beach. When the
birds were discouraged the polution dropped and swimming could resume. So a way to reduce
overall water polution is to drive all the animals away from the water.
Tha people are claiming that high buildings or structures would harm their neighborhood,
then Glens Falls would be in bad shape and Manhatten would be gone.
Yet there is another similarity to this overall episode of the objections to Great Escape's
expansion that can be seen in the Right to Farm Life Law which is in effect in many nearby
townships. A copy of the local law for Fort Ann is attached. I will let the reader make their own
comparisons. The town clerk stated that some minor revisions to the law are being considered.
Such interference has happened to many farmers causing the creation of local laws to detail
the conditions to residents. In general a simple conclusion can be realized. In comming large
businesses should locate away from established residential areas and in comming residents m ust
accept the complications of expansions.
This area will never reach to population density of Manhattan where people are piled on top
of each other in high rises that I call vertical human rabbit hutches.
John Collins, Great Escape
Rich Bergstrom, Darien Lake
John Gereau, Post Star
Respectfully Submitted,
Robert C. Greene
4111 State Route 9
Warrensburg, NY
3-195
TOWN
OF FORT ANN
LOCAL LAW
NO. 33 OF 1992
A
Local Law known as the
RIGHT TO
FARM IN THE TOWN OF FORT ANN
SECTION
1
TITLE
SECTION
2
DECLARATION OF POLICY AND
PURPOSE
SECTION
3
DEFINITIONS
SECTION
4
RIGHT TO FARM
SECTION
5
INTERFERENCE PROHIBITED
SECTION
6
CONVEYANCE OF ADJUSTING
PROPERTY
NOTICE
SECTION
7
CONSTRUCTION WITH OTHER LAWS
SECTION
8
REQUIREMENTS FOR INCLUSION WITHIN
SUBDIVISION, MOBILE HOME
PARKS AND
SITE PLAN PROJECTS
SECTION
9
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE
SECTION
10
RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES BY
GRIEVANCE
COMMITTEE
SECTION
11
EFFECTIVE DATE
1
LIN
3-196
'
TOWN OF FORT ANN
Local Law No. of 1992
A Local Law known as the
RIGHT TO FARM
OF THE TOWN OF FORT ANN
Be
follows:
it
enacted by the Town board of the Town of Fort Ann as
SECTION
1
TITLE:
This
Town of
local law shall be known as the Right to Farm of the
Fort Ann.
SECTION
2
DECLARATION OF POLICY AND PURPOSE:
It is the general purpose and intent of this local law to
' maintain and preserve the rural tradition and character of the
Town of Fort Ann, to permit the continuation of the business of
farming within the Town, to protect the existence and operation
of existing farms, and to encourage the initiation and expansion
' of farming businesses, consistent with the declared policy of the
State of New York in Article XIV of the State Constitution and
further enumerated in the Agriculture and Markets Law, Section
25AA and within this Local Law.
Town Board finds, declares, and determines that in order to
' maintain agriculture as the town's and New York state's largest
industry, farmers must be afforded protection allowing them the
right to farm.
' Since World War II, there has been a trend toward urban
expansion into suburban and rural areas. Increased populations
in rural areas often change the character of the community.
' Farming near other land uses may generate neighborhood conflicts.
Generally accepted farming practices may aggravate those who do
not understand agricultural methods. Neighbors may complain
' about odors, noise, dust, vibration, and the presence of slow -
moving vehicles. In some cases, residents may file a nuisance
suit against agricultural practices.
It shall be the declared policy of the Town of Fort Ann to
ensure farmers of the right to conduct generally accepted farm
practices in order to remain viable solvent.
' In recognition of the fact that there are many practices
and activities which are inherent to and necessary for the
business of farming, it is the specific purpose and intent of
this Local Law to attain the aforementioned goals and objectives
by providing that such practices and activities may proceed and
2
1 3-197
0
PI
be undertaken free of unreasonable and unwarranted interference
of restrictions. The Town Board further finds that the
continued maintenance and growth of farming are essential
elements in the economic stability of the Town of Fort Ann and so
declares that agriculture is one of the preferred and dominate
land use. An additional purpose is to promote a good neighbor
policy between agricultural and nonagricultural residents of the
Town and encourage farmers to be considerate, responsible and
careful with their practices so as to minimize the effect on
others as much as possible.
It is the general purpose and intent of this Local Law to
maintain and preserve the rural tradition and character of the
Town of Fort Ann, to permit the continuation of the business of
farming within the Town, to protect the existence and operation
of established farms, and to encourage the initiation and
expansion of farming businesses.
Currently, The Town of Fort Ann is located within the
Agricultural Districts of Washington County and is committed to
the continued practice of preserving as well as expanding
Agricultural Districts and in general farming within the Town -of
Fort Ann within or without Agricultural Districts.
SECTION 3 DEFINITIONS:
(a) Unless specifically defined below, words or phrases
used in this Local Law shall be interpreted so as to give them
the meanings they have in common usage and to give this Local Law
its most reasonable application.
(b) As used in this Local Law, the following terms shall
have the meaning indicated:
FARMER - Any person, organization, entity, association,
partnership or corporation engaged in the business of
agriculture, whether for profit or otherwise, including but not
limited to the cultivation of land, the raising of crops, the
raising of livestock, poultry, fur bearing animals or fish, the
harvesting of timber, or the practicing of horticulture or
apiculture.
FARMING PRACTICES - Any legal activity engaged in by a
farmer in connection with the furtherance of the business of
farming and shall include but not be limited to 1) the
collection, transportation, distribution and storage of animal
and plant wastes, 2) the storage, transportation and use of
equipment for tillage, planting and harvesting, 3) the
transportation, storage and use of legally permitted fertilizers
and limes, insecticides, herbicides and pesticides in accordance
with the manufacturer's instructions, and 4) the construction of
1 3-198
M
r
I
0
H
farm structures, fences and facilities as permitted by local and
state building code and regulations.
FARM PRODUCT - Those plants and animals useful to human
beings and includes, but is not limited to, forages and sod
crops, grains and feed crops, dairy and dairy products, poultry
and poultry produces, livestock, including breeding and grazing,
fruits, vegetables, flowers, seeds, grasses, trees, fish,
apiaries, equine or other similar products, or any other products
which incorporate the use of food, feed, fiber, or fur.
GENERALLY ACCEPTED AGRICULTURAL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES -
Those practices including, but not limited to, operation of farm
equipment; production, processing and marketing of farm products;
proper use of legal agricultural chemicals and other crop
protection methods; and construction and use of farm structures,
including such structures used for agricultural labor, as defined
by the commissioner of agriculture and markets after consultation
and approval by the state advisory council on agriculture. The
commissioner and the council shall give due consideration to
existing New York state department of agriculture and markets
information and written recommendations from the New York state
college of agriculture experiment station in cooperation with the
United States Department of Agriculture Soil and Conservation
Service and the Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation
Service, the Department of Environmental Conservation, and other
professional and industry organizations. Such practices may be
defined on a case -by -case basis.
PERSON - An individual, corporation, partnership,
association, or other legal entity.
TOWN - The Town of Fort Ann
SECTION 4 RIGHT TO FARM:
Farmers, as well as those employed or otherwise authorized
to act on behalf of farmers, may lawfully engage in farming
practices within the Town of Fort Ann at any and all such times
and all locations as are reasonably necessary to conduct the
business of farming.
For any activity or operation, in determining the
reasonableness of the time, place and methodology of such
operation, due weight and consideration shall be given to both
traditional customs and procedures in the farming industry as
well as to advances resulting from increased knowledge and
improved technologies.
4
I
3-199
L
ISECTION 5 INTERFERENCE PR
OHIBITED
t The Town of Fort Ann, County of Washington, State of New
York, and the U.S. Government shall not exercise any of its
powers to enact local laws or ordinances within the of Fort Ann,
' both within Agricultural Districts and without Agricultural
Districts, in a manner which would unreasonably restrict or
regulate (farm structures or farming practices) generally
accepted agricultural best management practices as defined by the
' commissioner after consultation and approval by the state
advisory council on agriculture and the state soil and water
conservation committee in contravention of the purposes of the
' act unless such restrictions of regulations bear a direct
relationship to the public health or safety.
' No person, group, entity, association, partnership or
corporation will engage in any conduct or act in any manner so as
to unreasonably, intentionally, knowingly and/or deliberately
interfere with, prevent, or in any way deter the practice of
' farming within the Town of Fort Ann. such actions may constitute
an offence, punishable by law with a fine of not less than
twenty-five dollars ($25.00) nor more than one hundred fifty
' dollars ($150.00) for each day's violation or continuance of
violation.
In addition, an action to restrain or enjoin any violation
of the Local Law may be brought in a court of competent
jurisdiction by any person and/or the Town of Fort Ann aggrieved
by such violation.
' A farm or farm operation shall not be found to be a public
or private nuisance if the farm or farm operation alleged to be a
' nuisance conforms to generally accepted agricultural best
management practices according to policy as determined by the
department of agriculture and markets. Generally accepted
agricultural best management practices shall be reviewed annually
' by the state advisory council on agriculture and the state soil
and water conservation committee and revised as considered
necessary by the department of agriculture and markets with the
approval of the advisory council on agriculture and the state
soil and water conservation committee.
SECTION I- CONVEYANCE OF ADJOINING PROPERTY NOTICE
' Conveyance of real ad' property joining lands eligible to
receive an agricultural assessment within agricultural districts.
1. Prior to entering into a contractual agreement for the
conveyance of any real property adjoining lands eligible to
receive an agricultural assessment pursuant to (Article 25AA of
5
11
3-200
' the Agriculture and Markets Law) the prospective grantor shall
deliver to the prospective grantee an affidavit which states the
following.
This property is adjacent to property used for agricultural
production. It is the policy of the Town of Fort Ann and this
' community to conserve, protect and encourage the development and
improvement of agricultural land for the production of food, and
other products, and also for its natural and ecological value.
' Farmers retain the legal right to conduct generally accepted
agricultural best management practices regarding operation of
farm equipment; production, processing and marketing of farm
' products; proper use of legal agricultural chemicals and other
crop protection methods; and construction and use of farm
structures. This notice is to inform prospective residents that
these agricultural activities may generate temporary dust, noise,
' odor, and vibration.
2. If an adjoining parcel of property is currently farming
' yet without the Agricultural District, this notification
requirement is recommended but not mandatory and the Section 2.is
not applicable.
' 3. Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, a
failure to comply with the provisions of subdivision one of this
section shall, at the option of the prospective grantee, render
' any contractual agreement between the prospective grantee and
the prospective grantor relative to such lands null and void,
provided that the prospective grantee declares such contractual
' agreement null and void prior to the actual conveyance by deed
of such lands.
SECTION 7 SUPERSESSION AND CONSTRUCTION WITH OTHER LAWS
a) It is the intent of this Local Law,•pursuant to the
powers of Municipal Home Rule Law, General Municipal Law, Town
' Law supersede any Washington County law, New York State law, or
Federal law and its rules and regulations when in conflict with
the policy and statement regarding the Right to Farm.
' Furthermore, it is the intent of this Local Law to preempt
State land use and/or Federal land use legislation, regulations
and policies when said legislation and policies and regulations
' conflict with the purposes, intent and objectives of this Local
Law; specifically NYS DEC, Adirondack Park Agency, and the United
States Park Agency it's rules and regulations.
' This Local Law does not intend to preempt or supersede the
Federal Flood Plain and Storm Water regulations to be developed
' and implemented by the Lake George Park Commission.
1 3-201
L
M
'
(b)
Pursuant to the authority provided in Section 22
of the
Municipal
Home Rule, provisions of the NYS Public Health
Law are
hereby changed
and superceded by this Local Law insofar
as they
'
apply to
farming practices, as defined herein, within the
Town of
Fort Ann.
'
1. Public Health Law, Section 1300-a shall not
2. Public Health Law, Section
apply;
1300-c shall be
changed
as follows:
t
Notwithstanding any other provisions
of law,
farming
practices shall not be considered a public or
private
nuisance,
provided such farming practices are consistent with
the best
management practices or generally accepted
farming
practices
which are undertaken in conformity with federal,
state
and local
laws, ordinances, rules or regulations which do
not unreasonably
'
restrict such practices in contravention of the
Local Law or the purposes of Article 25AA
purposes
of this
of the
Agriculture
and
Markets Law.
' (b) Except as provided in subsection "a", above, this Local
Law and the proscriptions set forth herein are in addition to and
not in lieu of all other applicable laws, rules and regulations
' which are therefore continued in full force and effect.
SECTION 8 REQUIREMENTS FOR INCLUSION WITHIN SUBDIVISION,
MOBILE HOME PARKS AND SITE PLAN PROJECTS
' The Town of Fort Ann will require the Fort Ann Planning
Board do record the following notation on all plats/mylars on any
' subdivision project (minor or major), mobile home park and site
plan projects approved by the Planning Board within the Town of
Fort Ann. Furthermore, the Town of Fort Ann will require the
' grantor within subdivision and site plan review to incorporate
this language in any subsequent conveyances by deed or other
means.
' "THIS PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE TOWN OF FORT ANN. IT IS THE
POLICY OF THE TOWN TO CONSERVE, PROTECT AND ENCOURAGE THE
DEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENT OF FARM OPERATIONS WITHIN
' OUR BORDERS FOR THE PRODUCTION OF FOOD AND OTHER PRODUCTS AND ONE
SHOULD BE AWARE OF THE INHERENT POTENTIAL CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED
WITH SUCH PURCHASES OR RESIDENCE."
'
"SUCH CONDITIONS MAY
INCLUDE
BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO NOISE,
ODORS, FUMES, DUST, SMOKE,
INSECTS,
OPERATION OF MACHINERY DURING
ANY HOUR, DAY OR NIGHT."
'
"STORAGE AND DISPOSAL
OF PLANT
AND ANIMAL WASTE PRODUCTS AND
THE APPLICATION OF CHEMICAL . FERTILIZERS, SOIL AMENDMENTS,
'
HERBICIDES AND PESTICIDES BY GROUND OR AERIAL SPRAYING OR OTHER
METHODS. OCCUPYING LAND WITHIN THE TOWN OF
FORT ANN MEANS THAT
7
1 3-202
H
I
11
H
Ci
C
ONE SHOULD EXPECT AND ACCEPT SUCH CONDITIONS AS A NORMAL AND
NECESSARY ASPECT OF LIVING IN SUCH AN AREA."
SECTION 9 SEVERABILITY CLAUSE
If any part of this Local Law is for any reason held to be
unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the
remainder of this Local Law. The Town Board of the Town of Fort
Ann hereby declares that it would have passed this Local Law and
each section and subsection thereof, irrespective of the fact
that any one or more of those sections, subsections, sentences,
clauses or phrases may be declared unconstitutional or invalid.
SECTION 10 RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES BY GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE
Any issue or controversy that arises which cannot be
resolved directly between the parties involved and is not
addressed by other laws or regulations, may be promptly and
inexpensively resolved by referral to the local Grievance
Committee.
(a) The Grievance Committee shall be appointed by the Town
Board and will consist of five (S) members. At least three 13)
of these members shall be residents of the Town of Fort Ann, two
of the three will be from an agricultural related business and
the other from a nonagricultural related background. Selection
of the two members may be at -large from within Washington County,
such as a county extension agent or other county official. The
original appointments shall have terms of two for one year, two
for two. years and one for three years. Thereafter members will
be appointed annually for a three year term.
(b) Any controversy between the parties shall be submitted
to a grievance committee within thirty (30) days of the date of
the occurrence of the particular activity giving rise to the
controversy or of the date a party becomes aware of the
occurance.
(c) The parties recognize the value and importance of full
discussion and complete presentation and agreement concerning
all pertinent facts in order to eliminate any misunderstandings.
The parties will cooperate in the exchange of pertinent
information concerning the controversy.
' (d) The controversy `Shall be presented to the committee by
written request of one of the parties within the time limits
specified. Thereafter the committee may investigate the facts of
the controversy but must, within thirty (30) days, hold a meeting
to consider the merits of the matter and within ten (10) days of
the meeting render a written decision to the parties. At the
' time of the meeting both parties shall have the opportunity to
present what each considers to be pertinent facts.
.g
1 3-203
f
{
(e)
The decision of the committee shall not be bin da.ng . I f
one of
decision,
_
the parties is not satisfied with the committee's
upon
submitted
agreement of both parties, the matter may be
to the Town Board according to the
in subsection
procedures set forth
"f" below.
(f)
Town Board Procedures:
1.
The controversy between the parties shall be submitted
to the Town Board upon written agreement of both
parties.
'
2.
The Town Board shall review the controversy with a
report submitted from the
proceedings of the grievance
committee. Within twenty (20) days of the written
request the Town Board shall render a written decision
'
to the parties.
SECTION 11 EFFECTIVE DATE
'
This
Local Law shall be effective immediately upon filing
pursuant to Section 27 of the Municipal Home Rule Law.
t
9
'
3-204
October 25, 2000
Queensbury Planning Board
Town Hall
'
Bay Road
NY 12804
Queensbury,
IRe: Comments on D.G.E.I.S., Traffic- Great Escape Theme Park
IDear Planning Board Members:
It was appropriate and wise for this board to seek a 5 year plan asking Six Flags what
their ultimate intensions are for current park areas and proposed areas of expansion. By
'
so doing. the community and it's leaders can both facilitate the positive and curb the
negative impacts that might be associated with this business resource. You and not Six -
Flags should be the body that determines the extent and order of any and all proposed
changes. Six Flags is a multi million, perhaps billion dollar subsidiary of an even larger
corporation whose headquarters is not located in the Town of'Queensbury or even
Warren county. Like most large corporations they are bottom line driven and not overly
concerned with any real or potential negative impacts to our neighborhoods or
community. This is not to say they do not want to be good neighbors, but after reading
the D.G.E.I.S., it is quite clear that the document was prepared as a mere formality. It
makes no attempt to enlighten or help the community understand the ramifications of all
that they intend to do. The first item in the N.Y.S.D.O.T. review of the D.G.E.I.S..
states, and I quote, " it is unclear what exactly is proposed in the area of existing access
drives/traffic signals and proposed pedestrian crossing". The reality is, there are literally
hundreds of statements beneficial to the applicant in the D.G.E.I.S. that have little if any
'
factual basis. The two exits from the proposed parking lots are directly across from
Round Pond Road and Glen Lake Road respectively. How can the applicant state that
exiting patrons won't use these roads because they won't know about them? How will
anyone not know about them if they are directly across from the two exit locations?
iTheir
plan creates a high probability that Round Pond Road will serve as the new main
if not defacto connector for 149 bound traffic, and yet this impact is never even
3-205
11
0
I
11
H
U
11
n
� I
I
I I
mentioned. Can Round Pond, Blind Rock and Bay Road handle this unknown additional
load? I enumerated other traffic concerns during your public open forum held at
Queensbury High School and I hope you will review that material.
I am attaching copies of the D.O.T. study which is brief and succinct. This study
alone exposes many inadequacies of the traffic analysis in the D.G.E.I.S., and, it is not
a stand alone document. The Adirondack -Glens Falls Transportation Council also sheds
light on a multitude of problems with the study. Both documents deserve your attention
and clearly state major problems with the conclusions and methodologies within the
applicants report.
In closing, I would ask that as protectors of community standards and public servants
you negotiate with the communities best interest first and foremost. ALL
INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIRED OR DEEMED EVEN REMOTELY NECESSARY. -
THAT IS OUTSIDE THE PARKS PRIVATE DOMAIN SHOULD BE COMPLETED
AT THE APPLICANTS EXPENSE BEFORE FINAL APPROVAL OF ON SITE
WORK. Examples would be sewer system hook up, firnctional traffic lane additions,
safe pedestrian and bicycle lanes , good interstate access and egress, bridge expansion if
necessary, signal timing changes, etc. After completing this work, subsequent
measurable Level Of Service figures might better serve as cut off points for future
attendance levels. This incorporated into a 5 or even 10 year plan with yearly
measurable criteria and numbers would provide greater assurance that Queensbury tax
payers WON'T PICK UP THE BILL OR SUFFER MAJOR QUALITY OF LIFE
CONSEQUENCES. This type of approach would serve the community in two ways.
The upfront community infrastructure improvements would show a genuine commitment
to the Town by the applicant, and at the same time insure that tax payers would not be
the ones stuck with the bills for future improvements that could result either directly or
indirectly from any changes at the location known as The Great Escape.
I would urge the board to proceed slowly and methodically and with as much
information as possible. This is the only way we can all feel good about the biggest
3-206
endeavor this community may see in quite some time. Little will be gained if you act
without full knowledge and appreciation of what is really being proposed.
Sincerely:
Roger Boor
3-207
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
From: Karen Angleson <kangleson@mybizz.net>
To: Karen Angleson <kangleson@mybizz.net>
Date: Friday, September 01, 2000 12:31 PM
Subject: Fw: Six Flags
----Original Message --
From: Karen Angleson <kangleson(d-)mybizz_net>
Date: Friday, September 01, 20001:34 PM
Subject: Six Flags
Six Flags of America is in your area. Would you answer some questions for me regarding issues with the
Amusement Park.
Where is the park located? (industrial, neighborhood or on the outskirts)
Have there been issues with noise, water quality such as run off to wet lands, traffic, visual impact, zoning ?
Have the Six Flags management been cooperative with your ordinances?
Are they open year round and what hours are they open?
Any information you would share will be most helpful in a survey I am doing for our area in upstate New York
State.
Sincerely,
Karen C. Angleson
1 Greenwood Lane
Queensbury, NY 12804
kangleson0mybizz.net
10/9/00 3 - 208
:sCC_; ACT
' Six Flags America
P.O. Box 4210
Largo, MD 20775
PH: 301-249-1500
Six Flags Astroworld & Waterworid
9001 Kirby Drive
Houston, TX 77054
r PH: 713-799-8404
■ Six Flags Darien Lake
9993 Allegheny Road
Darien Center, NY 14040
PH: 716-599-4641
Six Flags Elitch Gardens
299 Walnut
Denver, CO 80204
PH: 303-595-4386
Six Flags Fiesta Texas
17000 IH-10 West
San Antonio, TX 78257
'
PH: 210-697-5050
Six Flags Great Adventure,
'
Hurricane Harbor & Wild Safari
Route 537
Jackson, NJ 08527
'
PH: 732-928-1821
Six Flags Great America
t
542 N Route 21
Gurnee, IL 60031
- PH: 847-249-4636
Six Flags Kentucky Kingdom
937 Phillips Lane
'
Louisville, KY 40209
PH:502-366-2231
Six Flags Marine World
2001 Marine World Parkway
'
Vallejo, CA 94589
II of3 3-209 10/11/002.44PM
NH: /U/-b4j-b/ll
Six Flags Magic Mountain & Hurricane Harbor
26101 Magic Mountain Pkwy
Valencia, CA 93155
PH: 661-255-4100
From the Los Angeles area, call (818)367-5965
Six Flags New England
1623 Main Street
Agawam, MA 01001
PH: 413-786-9300
Six Flags Ohio
1060 N. Aurora Road
Aurora, OH 44202
t
PH: 330-562-7131
Six Flags Over Georgia
7561 Six Flags Parkway
Austell, GA 30168
t
PH:770-948-9290
Six Flags Over Texas
2201 Road to Six Flags
Arlington, TX 76010
PH: 817-640-8900
Six Flags St. Louis
I-44 & Allenton/Six Flags Rd
Eureka, MO 63025
PH: 314-938-4800
Frontier City
11501 NE Expressway
t
Oklahoma City, OK 73131
PH: 405-478-2412
Great Escape
Route 9 Box 511
Lake George, NY 12845
PH: 518-792-3500
Hurricane Harbor
1800 E Lamar Blvd.
Arlington, TX 76006
PH:817-265-3356
' 2of3
3-210
10/11/00 2.44 PY
spiasntown
21300 iH-45 North
Spring, TX 77373
PH: 281-355-3300
Waterworld USA Concord
1950 Waterworld Parkway
Concord, CA 94520
PH:925-609-1364
Waterworld USA Sacramento
1600 Exposition Blvd.
Sacramento, CA 95815
PH: 916-924-3747
White Water
250 N. Cobb Pkwy
Marietta, GA 30062
PH:770-424-6683
White Water Bay
3908 W Reno
Oklahoma City, OK 73107
PH: 405-943-9687 or 405-478-2412
Wyandot Lake
10101 Riverside Drive
Powell, OH 43065
PH:614-889-9283
i
�of3
3-211
10/11/00 2:44 PN.
r4*QIVii
1
From: Agawam Planning Department <planning@ci.agawam.ma.us>
To: kangleson@mybizz.net <kangleson@mybizz.net>
Date: Thursday, September 07, 2000 2:23 PM
Subject: Six Flags New England
I
Karen:
1
H
Premier Parks purchased Riverside Park approximately three and a half years
ago. The Park was in existence for over fifty years and family owned. It
is located on the southern end of Town on Main Street. It is zoned
Industrial and Agricultural and abuts some residential properties. The
area is mainly commercial in nature.
Traffic is our primary concern. The amount of traffic has increased
tremendously since the park was "branded" a Six Flags facility. We also
have concerns with parking and sewer and water use. The Massachusetts
Wetlands Protection Act is very strict, so wetlands issues are not
problematic, though there have been some violations.
Six Flags has not always been in conformance with local laws. We have
worked very hard to improve out relationship to insure that violations do
not occur.
The Park is open from May through November. The hours vary throughout the
season, but are generally from 10:00 AM to 11:00 PM.
If you would like more information, please let me know.
Debbie Dachos, Director of Planning and Community Development
10/9/00
JA � c..44&lf
3-212
Er
Q283
rage 1 vi ,4
From: Agawam Planning Department <planning@ci.agawam.ma.us>
To: Karen Angleson <kangleson@mybizz.net>; Agawam Planning Department
<planning@ci.agawam.ma.us>
Date: Wednesday, September 13, 2000 9:46 AM
Subject: Re: Six Flags New England
I Hi Karen, You can reach me at (413) 786-0400, extension 283. Debbie Dachos
----Original Message -----
From: Karen Angleson <kangleson@myaizz.net>
To: Agawam Planning Department <plannin ci.agawam.ma.us>
Date: Friday, September 08, 2000 2:28 PM
Subject: Re: Six Flags New England
>Debbie,
>
>1 would like to talk to you on the phone for a few questions if that is
>possible.
>
>Would you give me your number and a convenient time to call you.
>Thanks - my phone is 518-792-8553
>
>Karen Angleson
>
> Original Message-----
, >From: Agawam Planning Department <p!qnningaci.agawam_ma.us>
>To: kangleson a@mybizz._net <kangleson@Lmybizz net>
>Date: Thursday, September 07, 2000 2:23 PM
>Subject: Six Flags New England
>
»Karen:
»Premier Parks purchased Riverside Park approximately three and a half
years
>>ago. The Park was in existence for over fifty years and family owned. It
' >>is located on the southern end of Town on Main Street. It is zoned
>>Industrial and Agricultural and abuts some residential properties. The
>>area is mainly commercial in nature.
»
>>Traffic is our primary concern. The amount of traffic has increased
>>tremendously since the park was "branded" a Six Flags facility. We also
>>have concerns with parking and sewer and water use. The Massachusetts
>>Wetlands Protection Act is very strict, so wetlands issues are not
»problematic, though there have been some violations.
' 10/9/00
3-213
rt%u1.UlZ.
>>Six Flags has not always been in conformance with local laws. We have
>>worked very hard to improve out relationship to insure that violations do
>>not occur.
>>The Park is open from May through November. The hours vary throughout the
>>season, but are generally from 10:00 AM to 11:00 PM.
>>If you would like more information, please let me know.
>>Debbie Dachos, Director of Planning and Community Development
10/9/00
3-214
rage i of i
r1i
1
0
ri
From: Mayor Duncan <mayor@auroraoh.com>
To: kangieson@mybizz.net <kangleson@mybizz.net>
Date: Friday, October 06, 2000 9:58 AM
Subject: Six Flags
Dear Karen,
Your e-mail was forwarded to me and I will give you as much information as I can. The problem in our
community is that only about five (5) percent of the Six Flags park is in Aurora. We get almost all the traffic
and few of the benefits. The response to your questions in order are:
1. The park is located in a Commercial/Recreational zoning district. It is not our zoning so I can't tell you
much more.
The area is in a township located between two municipalities. We provide water to the water attractions and
they have their own package plant for sewer.
2. There are issues with noise, closeness of major rides to the major access 'road as well as traffic, traffic,
traffic.
3. This just became a Six Flags park a year ago. Since so little is actually in Aurora, we have very little say in
what happens.
4. They are not open year round. They typically open around the middle of May on weekends only, then every
day after Memorial Day until Labor Day. From Labor Day until the end of October they are open on weekends
only again.
You can obtain more info by writing to the Bainbridge Township Trustees at the following address:
Christopher Hom, President
Bainbridge Township Trustees
17826 Chillicothe Road
Chagrin Falls, Ohio 44023
Thanks for you inquiry and I hope I have helped.
I
I
1
10/9/00 3 - 215
1
rage i of L
From: JJ1953@aol.com <JJ1953@aol.com>
To: KANGLESON@mybizz.net <KANGLESON@mybizz.net>
t Date: Sunday, October 01, 2000 3:51 PM
Subject: YOUR LETTER ABOUT SIX FLAGS
Hello Karen,
My name is Joanna Johnson and. I am Councilwoman/ Deputy Supervisor for the
Town of Darien. The Supervisor of Darien is Mr. Kimberly J. Drew not Mr.
Reynolds this is for your information. I will answer your questions about
Six Flags in the order you have asked them.
1. Six Flags is located in a REC district (recreational) which is surrounded
by LDR district (Low Density Residential)
2. There are many issues with the park. Noise is a very big issue when they
have concerts. It can be heard at times at least 2 miles away. It has caused
a lot of complaints from the people who are in line with these concerts. The
concerts have caused us major traffic problems as we are rural town and the
roads are not big enough to handle the traffic. They are located on a main
state road Rt 77 and the thruway is about 6 miles north of Six Flags. When
they have concerts Rt. 77 is backed up to the Thruway for 10 miles. When they
had the Pfish concert it started at 7:30 PM they were still backed up on the
Thruway at 10:00 and the concert is over at
11:00 PM. It was a major tie up. Our court costs have increased because of
Six Flags. The arrests are for everything from A to Z. Whatever you can
think of drugs, fights, sexual contact with a minor, DWI. Also drug
overdose, alcohol overdose. You name it we have the problem. We have a lot
of motor vehicle accidents. After the Further concert we had a girl dead in
the parking lot. Your asking for trouble the more they expand. But, you
probably can't stop them from expanding. Right now our Six Flags needs more
water then they can get so right now they are slowed down.
They do create a lot of sales tax for our town and other surrounding towns
but, sometimes you wonder when we have problems. We don't have a lot of
businesses in Darien as we are a small town. So this helps us even with the
problems. They do go through zoning for permits and such.
Six Flags has been cooperative at times and at other times they can be
difficult. They are open from the first week in May until Labor Day weekend.
Then they are open only on weekends through the rest of Sept. In October
they are open weekends all month for a Halloween Festival/Fright Night.
Our greatest problems are the arrests and traffic tie ups and noise from the
concerts.
If I can be of any assistant to you just email me and I'll do whatever I can.
Would you let me know how your findings come out. I would also be interested
in what you find out from other towns about Six Flags maybe it would help us
10/9/00 3 - 216
Page 2 of 2
here.
Thank you
Joanna Johnson
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
10/9/00 3 - 217
October 21, 2000
IMr. Craig MacEwan
Chairperson, Town Planning Board
Queensbury Town Hall -
'
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804 -- ---.
tDear
Mr. MacEwan:
The following comments are made in response to the DGEIS
submitted by the Great Escape for their proposed five-year
expansion.
In their draft they state that the environmental impacts
are minimal compared to the economic benefits of their expansion.
The impact produced by clear -cutting all of the trees from the
Samoset Motel property to the Coach House Restaurant cannot under
any circumstance be considered minimal. In addition to the
aesthetic impact of this removal, there is a noise impact..uporj
the neighborhoods of Courthouse Estates and Glen Lake, and an
enormous impact upon Glen Lake from stormwater run-cff. The
decibel noise level from the 200-ft. rollercoaster will be
heard far beyond the Park's boundaries.
H
If you remove all of these tree:: and replace them with
paved parking, as proposed, then all of the rainwater ' >;: the
pollutants coming f;:on! the cars (gasoline, oil, antifreeze and
other hydrocarbons) will drain into the proposed catch -basins
and pass into the groundwater entering the Glen Lake via the
Glen Lake Brook. The trees currently absorb enormous quantities
of water and the airborne pollutants found in that rainwater
will have a detrimental effect on Glen Lake water quality and
reduce property values.
Removal of a considerable amount of soil from this area to
add five feet to the lower parking areas will reduce the natural
berm. This berm acts, with the trees, to buffer the noise from
the Northway that reaches the adjacent neighborhoods.
The aesthetic impact is also important. The scenic vistas
make Queensbury "A nice place to live". Visitors also expect
to see beautiful stands of trees along our roadways. This stretch
of Route 9 typifies this beauty.
An alternative is to erect a parking structure on the old
Animal Land property to account for spaces lost by not paving
the aforementioned treed area.
In conclusion, a connection to the Glens Falls sewage system
should be made which would not add groundwater problems.
Si erely, --�
Raymond anAoan Erb
3-218 19 Fitzgerald Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
I
Mr. Craig MacEwan
Chairperson, Town Planning Board
Queensbury Town Hall
' 742 Bav Road
Queensbury, New York 12804
I
Dear Mr. MacEwan;
n
I
1610 Bay Road
Lake George. New York
October 22, 2000
The environmental impact of the DGEIS submitted by the Great Escape is anything BUT
minimal, as they have stated in their draft. Clear cutting all the trees from the Samoset
Motel to the Coach House Restaurant would be a terrible negative impact on that area!
If you remove all of these trees and replace them with paved parking, as proposed, all of
the rainwater plus the pollutants coming from the cars will drain into the proposed catch
basins and pass into the ground water entering Glen Lake. The scenic vista would be
ruined by eliminating this beautiful stand of trees. It also blocks the highway and noise_.
from the traffic along that stretch of the r,orthway.
I can't imagine anyone on the planning board agreeing to such a plan! Why not, instead,
erect a parking structure either on the old "Animal Land" property, or even on and over the
present parking lot across Rte 9 from the Great Escape? It would also be a base for the
walking bridge across the highway to the park. That parking area is already an eye -sore
for Northway travelers, and it would only increase the problem if the tree removal proposal
is allowed.
We have owned a house on Glen Lake since the late 1970's, when we purchased a building
that has been there since before the creation of the Great Escape, or even Storytown. We
do not want to see the growth of the park from our deck or dock. We already have noticed
an increase in the noise level, especially when riding, or walking on the Warren County
Bike Trail. I don't know how people in new homes off Birdsall Road can stand the
constant screams and rumble of the rollercoaster.
You have already allowed several changes along Mannis Road that are obviously a matter
of knowing the right person. You grant variances or fail to monitor building permits that
go against the rules of the planning board, until it is too late to correct any problems.
Please don't allow more environmental mistakes for the sake of "economical benefits" for
a few, or worse yet, for political reasons.
1 Sincerely, _- /
Glenn and Regina Powell
Owners of 175 Mannis Road
Queensbury, N.Y.
i
1
3-219
akme.n
3feaith
5-nstiture
Progressive healthcare & wedness for :•:omen
I.- - -i ', _
October 22, 2000
'_vlr. Craig MacEwan
Chairperson, Twon Planning Board
Queensbury Town Hall
42 Bay Rd.
Queensbury, NY 12804
Dear Mr. MacEwan:
Please add the following comments to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement
submitted by the Great Escape.
It was evident to all concerned that the increase in attendance created by Six Flags
marketing efforts initiated in 1999 created an untenable stress on traffic and the
environment in the ,Iicinity of the Park. After reviewing their expansion plans in this
DGEIS, it is obvious that some of the same problems will still remain unsolved.
Traffic on collateral roadways such as Glen Lake Rd., Round Pond Rd. and Gurney Lane
will still be problematic. Srudies should be done to determine the levels of service
decline on these roads. In addition. without a dedicated exit from I87, the delay_ s on
Route 9 will continue as attested by New Fork State DOT studies.
Removal of the trees from the Coach House to the Samoset Motel will remove one of the
aesthetic assets of our community and also result in the addition of more groundwater
pollutants to the Glen Lake watershed. It is noted that a stormwater management plan
'
was included which merely dealt with the problems of getting the run-off into the
groundwater while completely ignoring the pollutants carried in that run-off. Such a
study should be included. In addition. an alternative parking plan should be adopted
which allows all of those trees to remain, with an exception for those in the path of the
proposed ring road.
„ 1
3-220
ill P•irL- �:rri-at CnitP 101 • i Prrnm Pnvilinn nt (,Ivnc Fnllc HnrnitnlI (,ipn, Fnllc NY 1ISif)1 i 1 $2
C
L
I1-irninw- t:-n%
::r.i,.w •.:r!^nN,
Domen J
3fealth
7-nsfitute
Progressive heaithcar: & wellness for cvomen
Under no circumstances should a sewage treatment plant be built within close proximity
to a DEC classified wetland and inlet to a lake. The risk potential is too great and the
addition of nutrients to those waters must be prevented at all cost.
In closing, I must emphasize that the quality of life which makes Queensbury known as
"a nice place to live" must be maintained by zealously protecting the environment which
has drawn us to our Town. We have enjoyed clean water, beautiful vistas, tranquility and
a.lack of big city traffic. This project will intrude upon these vistas with the erection of a
200 foot ride structure, replace trees with ugly parking lots, cause more traffic jams and
add pollutants to our waters. This project must be severely limited in its size to protect
the sensitive environment in which it is located.
Sin erly,
vl
Michael Guido, M.D.
- 3-221
,� n - `'�-- -. c..:.� ant _ • n---- -- r'---_�: -�- -. nr---- r. _n_ cr_--=--1' �t __.. tr..tt _ +.ry t won, -, n. -, .-. .,......
I
C
F
C
U
u
Oct 22 2000 +
Mr. Craig MacEwan
Chairperson. Town Planning Board
Queensbury Town Hall
742 Bav Rd.'
Queensbury N. Y. 12804
Dear Mr. MacEwan
The proposed expansion of the Great Escape is of great concern to my family and all of
my neighbors on Glen Lake. I have been enjoying my summer place since 1958.
Since that time the amusement park has been expanding steadily. The character of the
area has deteriorated along xvith these expansions. It is high time to call a halt before
the area is completely destroved. There is such a thing as saturation point and I feel
it has been reached. The economic benefits will be for the owners of the park and not
to the Town or it's residents. The Town already reaps benifits and any expansion will
only add to the cost of traffic control , noise pollution, water pollution, erosion and
the lowering of the value of the surrounding real property. Once this has been done,
it can never be corrected.
Please consider all of these facts when making your decissions.
Sincerely
<,7Z
Robert H Vannier
n
3-222
17 Fitzgerald Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
October 22, 2000
Mr. Craig MacEwan, Chairman
Town Planning Board�--
Queensbury Town Hall
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804 _
Dear Mr. MacEwan: --
I would like to make the following comments regarding the
DGEIS submitted by the Great Escape for their proposed 5-year
expansion.
In their draft they state the environmental impacts are
minimal compared to the economic benefits of their expansion.
The impact produced by clear -cutting all of the trees from..the
Samoset Motel property to the Coach House Restaurant cannot
under any circumstances be considered minimal. In addition to
the aesthetic impact of this removal, there is a noise impact
upon the neighborhoods of Courthouse Estates and Glen Lake,
and an enormous impact upon Glen Lake from stormwater run-off.
If you remove all of these trees and replace them with paved
parking, as proposed, then all of the rainwater plus the
pollutants coming from the cars (e.g. gasoline, oil, antifreeze
and other hydrocarbons) will drain into the proposed catch -
basins and pass into the groundwater entering the Glen Lake via
the Glen Lake Brook. The trees currently absorb enormous
quantities of water and the airborne pollutants found in that
rainwater.
Removal of a considerable amount of soil from this area to add
5 feet to the lower parking areas will reduce the natural berm.
This berm acts, with the trees, to buffer the noise from the
Northway that reaches the adjacent neighborhoods.
The aesthetic impact is also important. The scenic vistas
make-Queensbury "a nice place to live". Visitors also expect
to see beautiful stands of trees along our roadways. This
stretch of Route 9 typifies this beauty.
An alternative is to erect a parking structure on the old
Animal Land property to account for spaces lost by not paving
the aforementioned treed area.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Galloway
'
3-223
F
October 22.2000
'
Craig MacEwen. Chairperson and Town Planning Board Members
Queensbury Town Hall _
742 Bav Road .. ____
'
Queensbury. NY 12804
RE: Great Escape's Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
Glen Lake and its watershed is a critical environmental area. I feel that the Great Escape Park,
which includes all of Park Areas A. B and C. is already at peak development and that any major
construction within The Park would have major negative impacts on the watershed and therefore
'
on Glen Lake. For example. the Great Escape's proposal to remove trees and pave parking lots
will have adverse impacts. Keeping an adequate forest environment is essential within the
'
watershed because tree roots absorb run off and stabilize the soils and tree leaves intercept
rainfall that reduces the impact of the water on the ground thus reducing erosion and nutrient
loading into the watershed. How can it be that removing trees and paving parking lots will not
negatively impact the watershed? Further, the Great Escape's DGEIS argues that the proposed
'
runoff levels will be the same or slightly less than those currently experienced. Question: Are
current the levels of runoff and nutrient loading acceptable? Will the Board require that the Great
Escape address this question? If not, why not? The DGEIS has failed to show that proposed
storm water runoff and associated nutrient levels would not have negative impacts. Shouldn't the
'
DGEIS prove that storm water runoff and erosion would not adversely effect the watershed? I am
also very concerned that the property values on Glen Lake will decrease, not only from poor
water quality but also because of adverse visual, noise and traffic impacts. Is the Great Escape
prepared to guarantee they will have no negative effects on our property values and lake quality?
Glen Lake properties represent a significant source of revenue for the town. They provide in
'
excess of $45 million dollars in tax revenue. Comparatively, The Great Escape, even at projected
levels. will provide $25.6 million in tax revenues. Do the economic benefits of the expansion out
weigh the loss of propem• values? Shouldn't the Great Escape include in its DGEIS an analysis
for the potential of decreasing property values on Glen Lake and surrounding residential areas?
In the executive summary section of the Great Escape's DGEIS, it states that, "The Project will
not have adverse visual or audible noise impacts on the community and the residential
neighborhoods within the study area." 1 believe this conclusion is erroneous, and here are a
few of the reasons why:
Visual appearance is an important factor to tourism in this area. People come here for the total
experience: the beautiful scenery, nature, the lakes, the stores and, of course, a trip to The Great
Escape. It would be a shame to destroy a significant part of this experience by the removal of
virtually all of the trees between Route 9 and the Northway. This would cause adverse visual
impacts. Is this what we want Queensbury to look like? For instance, when driving into the area,
whether by Route 9 or the Northway, the uniqueness of the natural Adirondack look would be
gone. In addition to the visual impacts, there would also be a significant increase in audible noise
from the Park and the Northway. This would be due to the lack of trees and existing hills, which
create a natural noise buffer, contrary to claims made in this DGEIS.
Regarding the proposed 200' ride, this is unacceptable. Such a ride would tower over the
g g
treetops, being visible from all of the surrounding areas, especially from Glen Lake. The
proposed ride will be about three times the height of the existing tree line. Picture the two Glens
i
3-224
I
he e are an evesore, and
Falls water towers that are visible while learl° � de will halvesnegative visual impacts,
are only about 30' above the tree line. Y at200'
such a ride will definitely impact all o nes residents.the Glen Lake
tsary to what the D. being that there are no
claims. Further. such a ride will have ttive audible noiseimpa
otherwise, to block or deflect the screams from the patrons and mechanical noise
buffers. trees or
I
from the ride itself.
e irreversible.
Project will bthe
Iby the psthe Board willing to rule that osed expansion
Please remember. all impacts caused visual and
Therefore, we need to mitigate them beforehand.
peak development
s at
e area
r that
s area
audible noise impacts will be too great for i
mitigate these dversed
watershed? notthn orderlto
the vat
that it is more important to maintain
environmental impacts, will the Town Planning Board require that:
1) The Project be scaled down?
2) Large buffers of existing trees are left in tact to reduce the negative visual and
noise impacts and reduce runoff?
3) The Project maintains the scenic beauty of the area.
The height of all structures, rides, buildings, etc., be kept at or below the tree line?
4)
5) Any motel or other structures be incorporated into the existing landscape setting?
(e.g. to leave numerous mature trees and existing hills)
6) The Great Escape offers better alternatives (e.g. replace existing non effective
keep the
rides/attractions with new rides or create unpaved parking lots and
majority of existing trees).
7) More water testing be done to insure that current or proposed nutrient levels are
not harming Glen Lake or the fen.
8) Great Escape ensures that its development will have no negative impacts on water
quality of the watershed (which includes Glen Lake) and Glen Lake property
values.
'
If not, why not.
Respectfully,
�7�.fJ�cz�:Z.�-�l�l•L/
Lorraine Stein
'
86 Ash Drive
Lake George, NY 12845
(518) 761-7015
H
1 3-225
7,1
I
11
:,b Reardon Rd.
)ue. %buil _ -`: i
`• ir. Craw$ l lacEwan
hairperson. Town Planning Board
:ueensbun- Token Building-
Bav t:d.
Th: Town of Queensbury is at a turnim-point. and the planners must &—ide on the future
direction. Do we aQcornmo(tatu ramp_ ant expansion of a seasonal tourist facility or say
_r, )u`' i is _Inough.'
The loni7-term. balanced futur;: oI this ::ommurU*vv will be best sen ed by ncourazing
broad business investment and residential Jrow-rh of a year-round nature. The equality of
sf�, in Qucensbun- (water purin-. l;,an air and natural beaus) is at risk for the benefit of a
tetiti non -Committed transients.
i ii:. LISC:Ij)e ii;li ij.::n oven .;.,)nstd;�rable coop�rauon by iilis C;ornmunin' to our
!natual advanta<_e. ,:kltat is now beinv asked is unreasonable and shouid b;° rentsed by th;.
,fanners.
:lease don't make the imolved. taxpaying residents an endangered species.. Than: you
or your attention the this resuest and that of the mangy• other concerned residents.
John R. Buchanan
I
3-226
October 22. 2000
To Craig MacEwgn. Chairperson and Town Planning Board Members ;�• �
Queensbury Town Hall
742 Bav Road
Queensbury. NY 12804
RE: Great Escape's Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
A Scary Halloween Storv: Glen Lake Water Oualitv and Our Shared Watershed
Last weekend, on October 21. I took my students from Siena College on a fieldtrip to Lake
George, where we participated in the LGA's Floating Classroom and ecological forest walk. Part of this
wonderful educational experience is a watershed experiment. Rainwater and soil is poured onto a model of
a watershed so students can see the negative effects caused by runoff and nutrient loading into a lake. In
one portion of the model a sponge is placed in a hole. The sponge represents a wetland, which acts to slow
runoff and filter out nutrients before they reach the lake. The wetland is good; it protects the lake. And for
a time the sponge sopped up the water and eroded dirt and nutrients. But there came a point when the
wetland sponge reached its saturation point. Then the runoff. the eroded soils and the nutrients were
released into the lake. at rates manv. manv times higher than the norm. What's the point? Once the
wetlands. that natural sponge. is saturated it works in reverse. and rather than protect the lake, it pollutes it
at rates faster than havine no %%etlands at all. This experiment frightened me. I knew that wetlands acted -as
a natural sponge. but I did not know that once full the negative effects were more harmful than having no
wetland at all.
The Glen Lake fen (the wetlands between the Great Escape and Glen Lake) is, of course, our
protective wetlands, our natural sponge. Perhaps to this point it has been able to absorb the erosion, the
nutrient loading, the gasoline and oil contaminants. the road and storm water runoff, the septic leaching, the
fertilizers and pesticides. the garbage. and the environmental pollutants from development in the Glen Lake
Watershed. But then again perhaps it has not. We do not know, and the Great Escape's DGEIS did not tell
us. The Great Escape did not tell us because they did not test the Glen Lake fen to see if current, or past, or
potential future pollutant levels will or have already reached points of saturation. Throughout the DGEIS
the assumptive claims are made that levels of nutrient loading from storm water runoff and septic or
sewage effluent discharge will remain at or slightly below current levels (see for example page v and 4-32).
The further assumption is made. albeit never explicitly stated. that the Glen Lake fen now and in the future
will absorb the levels of pollutants the Great Escape will discharge into the wetlands and watershed
streams. However, there is no measurement of the environmental impacts of current levels of nutrient
loading, septic leaching, erosion, fertilizer or pesticides use. oil -based discharge, or pollutants from
development. While the DGEIS data may show comparative figures now to future, the Great Escape does
not address the equally or more important issue of the condition of our shared wetland.
Perhaps the wrong questions are being asked. Will the Planning Board require the Great Escape to
test current levels of nutrient loading into the Glen Lake fen? If not, please explain why not? Perhaps a
more important indicator of future environmental impacts is not the amount of allowable runoff and
nutrient loading into the wetlands, but how long it will be before the sponge is full, and what will be the
environmental impacts on Glen Lake and all of Queensbury then? How can the Planning Board accept any
version of a GEIS without this information? I suggest contacting the DEC Lakes and Freshwater Division.
especially Scott Kishbaugh or our own Queensbury resident Bill Morton, to run computer models on the
effects of pollutants into the fen to determine the rate and approximate time of saturation. Will the
Planning Board require this or a similar action before accepting a completed GEIS? Further, will the
Planning Board stipulate in the completed GEIS that if water quality in Glen Lake and its watershed
deteriorates in the future due to Great Escape operations that the Great Escape or its parent company or
owner/operator at the time will be held legally responsible to Glen Lake, the Town of Queensbury and
Town residents and will pay to repair damages, restore water quality and/or pay restitution to its victims?
If not, please explain why not.
3-227
L I
Issues and Questions from the DGEIS:
The Glen Lake Neiahborhood
Page 3-22 of the DGEIS defines the Glen Lake Neighborhood as follows: "There are also three
distinct neighborhoods nearby. There is a group of six or seven homes located along the
southwesterly portion of Glen Lake about one-third of a mile (approx. 1.500 feet) from the Park"
(see also figure 3-5: Land Use Map: this map does not accurately show households). Is this a
purposeful attempt to minimize the Glen Lake Neighborhood in the DGEIS? All aspects from
Park operations -- water use, runoff and discharge, visual impacts, noise impacts, traffic. electrical
' lines, terrestrial and aquatic vegetation and the economic factors -- are relevant to Glen Lake and
the entirety of its watershed, and potentially have devastating environmental and economic results.
even though this DGEIS wrongly states that Glen Lake currentIv has NO (and will have no future)
impacts from the Park operations. Any description of The Glen Lake Neighborhood should
t include all riparian owners. Nevertheless, even by the DGEIS descriptions and maps (see section
1:2 - Project Location and Figure I- 1: Project location map), the "primary study area'
encompasses at least the inlet bav of Glen Lake, which has approximately 40 riparian homes. It is
' also interesting to note that unlike the Twicwood and Courthouse neighborhoods, many of the
current Glen Lake homes predate the establishment of Mr. Wood's Park in 1952 or 1953 (e.g. my
home was a year around home in the 1940s. as was my neighbors). which negates the Great
Escape's seniority argument. By the logic of their argument. the "old-timers" of Glen Lake would
' be able to nulliA, current zoning larks and lake front usages, which were not in effect at that time.
And even if all the residents within the surrounding neighborhoods came after 1953, nearly all of
us moved in prior to any expansion from Premier Parks or Six Flags. Certainly by their reasoning
' our seniority should take precedence. Will the Town Planning Board require that the Great Escape
include all of Glen Lake in its generic environmental studies?� If not. what arguments can be made
to not include the entirety of Glen Lake in this impact study? If the whole lake is not included will
the Planning Board require that the Great Escape redo the appropriate portions of the DGEIS to
include areas of Glen Lake designated by their scooping document and DGEIS? And will the
public be allowed to review and comment on such changes?
Water Quality: Storm Water Runoff. Wetlands. Septic
> (pgs: iv. 2-15) The Park has only done storm water runoff analysis and mitigation measures
for Area C. Should not the Project include the development of a comprehensive storm water
' management plan for ALL properties owned by the Project sponsor, or at least an analysis
including Park Area A? Shouldn't the DGEIS include storm water runoff. groundwater and
subsurface water data on Park Area A? What are and will be the combined runoff affects in
' these developed Areas A & C?
A reference was made that Park Area A may be expanded to full build out in the future. As
stated on page 4-35 (sec Land Use — Park Area ' A). "...the entire 81.7 acres ... [may] be
converted to impervious surfaces and still conform with the zoning requirements of having
30% permeable area on that lot" (4-35). What effect will this have on runoff? Does this meet
the criteria for "appropriate and responsible watershed development" as set forth in the Glen
' Lake watershed Management Plan, which was adopted by the Town in 1999?
►- (pg. v, 4-32). It is stated that storm water runoff from proposed expansion will meet or only
slightly increase the nutrient loading levels of current conditions. Are current runoff levels
' acceptable? Have analyses of current storm water runoff. surface and subsurface water
quality conditions been done both within the watershed streams and the Glen Lake fen?
Please explain why such studies have not been included in the DGEIS? Will the Planning
' Board require such studies in the final GEIS?
(sections 4.5.3, 4.10; pgs. 4-29 & 30, and appendix #2). Analysis of data and methodology
for storm water runoff will require an expert. Has the Town hired an objective Third Party
firm to review this data? If a third party was hired. does the public have access to and time to
1 2 3-228
1
[l
I
u
publicly respond to these reports and data? It has come to my attention that the Chazen report
on the Great Escape's storm water runoff data was not available for public review, even
though it was legally requested. until October 24 or 25. Will the Planning Board allow the
public additional time to review and comment upon this specific and important information?
If not. why not?
Do the proposed development and storm water management plans take into consideration the
removal of existing trees and vegetation in its water quality and runoff analyses? It seems
common sense that existing, mature trees would be better for the natural filtration of nutrient
runoff, as compared to the .anew plantings" proposals. Will mature trees, which hold up to
two tons of soil in place and are the best water and nutrient absorption system available, be
preserved to the greatest extent possible to preserve soil retention? Are such alternative
conditions being considered for the proposed project? If replantings are proposed, what size
trees will be required? Shouldn't the size of such trees approximate current conditions?
Page 4-32 of the DGEIS states that paved. impervious parking surfaces in Area C will
increase from 18.6 to 38.9 acres. How does this proposed development stack up to conditions
put forth in the Glen Lake Watershed Management Plan? How do the combined development
plans for the parking lots. a hotel. a possible convention center AND the build out of Park
Area A tit with the Glen Lake {Watershed .1anagement Plan and its figures for future
development acreage within the watershed? Has this watershed plan even been reviewed and
considered? Has or will the Planninu Board use the Eutromod model -- a computer generated
model which predicts phosphorous loading to Glen Lake from large developments — in
reviewing this DGEIS?
: There appears to be no recognition in the DGEIS for the potential use of pesticides,
herbicides, fertilizers or any other chemicals within newly developed Park Area C. Won't
new plantings, building a hotel and convention center, possible parking islands, etc. require
the use of pesticides and chemicals? Does any analysis of potential use and impacts from
such chemicals upon the surrounding wetlands exist in the DGEIS?
Will Six Flags or the Great Escape consider the donation of the wetland areas to the Open
Space Institute or any other nongovernmental protective organization as part of its mitigation
efforts? Should not this option be seriously considered given the findings of rare flora and
fauna — see pages 3-5 & 6. Dr. Norton Miller's report on rare flora and page 4-11 and
Appendix letter on the rare Kamer Blue Butterfly.
: Has the DGEIS used a storm water management plan based upon the standards adopted by the
Town for the Lake George areas, or have less stringent criteria been used? If less, why? Is
not the Glen Lake watershed also an important natural resource?
: Will the Great Escape be required to perform long-term sampling, monitoring programs on
storm water runoff, septic/sewage leachage. and other water quality related aspects? How can
the Town and the public check such monitoring practices?
: (pg. 2-12) Proposed figures for sewage amounts appear to not represent a 70% growth rate
[from current 45,636 GPD to 60.000 GPD]. Should this figure not be closer to 68,000 to
69.000 GPD? Also, how will effectiveness of such a treatment plant be monitored? The
proposed nutrient figures for the effluent discharged appear to be minimally within accepted
boundaries. Is this adequate given that this plant resides within or immediately adjacent to a
sensitive environmentally critical zone? Are there proposed alternative mitigation plans for
the released effluent?
: Representatives from the Great Escape have, since the Public Hearing, stated that running the
sewer line to The Park may be the best alternative. I agree this may be so. The threshold for
septic or sewage leachage or effluent discharge should be zero. However, under no
I
3 3-229
11
r�
I
1
Electricity
Noise
1
I
conditions should the "no action alternative" option to leave in place and operational the
current septic field systems to deal with septic discharge be allowed. Current septic
systems will not be able to handle increased usage, and the risk potential to Glen Lake is
far too high. A better alternative is their proposed on -site treatment plant. Will the
Planning Board require the Great Escape to remove the "no action alternative" from its
alternatives section? If not, why not?
Will the Planning Board require the Great Escape to consider other alternatives to paved
parking within the Park, particularly within the primary parking areas in Park Area C?
Possible other alternatives should include (1) a no action alternative which keeps parking lots
as grass or dirt areas. (2) the use of new parking area technologies specifically engineered for
environmentally sensitive areas? I have attached two fliers of possible alternatives to paved
parking lots: (a) the Uni Eco-Stone Water Management System, and (b) the Grass Pave2.
Draincore2 technologies. These technologies, I am informed by experts, are environmentally
superior to the DGEIS proposed storm water runoff plan, and the costs of these systems are
not prohibitive. Will the Board require that the Great Escape seriously consider these or
similar alternatives? You may contact me if further information is desired.
(pas. 2-16. 24. 25: 7-7) The DGEIS gawps plans to run higher. 50' electricity polls with more
and thicker power lines along Ash Drive and Glen Lake Road are unacceptable. DGEIS
claims such a chance is within the current "visual character" of the area. However, a closer
look at that path (see photos) will show the necessity to remove existing trees and to cut back
many. manv branches along Ash Drive and Glen Lake Road. This certainly will radically
alter the "visual character" of our neighborhoods. Why not use the Birdsall path or bury the
lines. as is the plan within the Park so as to not diminish the functional and aesthetic qualities
of the park? In addition, if other alternative plans to run power lines or produce electricity.
other than those stated in the DGEIS, are used or proposed, will the public have the right to
comment on these new proposals? Further, can the Great Escape make alternative plans of
any kind without public review and comments? If it cannot, what actions can be taken to
remedv deviations from the DGEIS after the fact?
The statement in the DGEIS (pg 4-21) that ....., there is no causal relationship between
_rowth in visitor attendance, the corresponding level of general Park operations as
contemplated by the proposed Project and the increase in audible noises impacts in the
receptor neighborhoods" is. I believe. WRONG.
From page 3-34: "With respect to the measured sound readings, topography is very important.
With reference to section 4.8. the figure entitled, `Line of Sight Profiles,' it can be seen that
the Glen Lake Shore Monitoring Point does not have a clear `Line of Sight' from the Park or
major potential noise source as the 1-87 corridor. As can be seen from the Glen Lake
monitoring results in particular. even though a monitoring point may be physically very close
to the Park or another noise source. existing intervening topography such as a hill is very
effective in limiting noise propagation." As to where the monitoring devise was placed for
these tests, that may be true. However, at my home on Ash Drive and for many others to
whom I have spoken, the noise from the park and particularly from the Alpine Bobsled does
exist. In fact, noise from the Bobsled has been reported from the outlet bay of the lake, over
two miles away. In addition. from my home there is a clear auditory"Line of Sight" from the
Park. On manv days throughout the summer the Alpine Bobsled can be heard clearly inside
of my home with all windows and the door closed. It appears suspiciously convenient that the
Park (or perhaps Mr. Wood in 1990) picked this placement behind a hill for its monitoring
sight. While this may be the closest point to the Park, it is not the affected portion of Glen
Lake, at least for noise concerns. At the public hearing, Great Escape sound engineers were
invited to use my home as a monitoring station. This has been done by mutual agreement and
4 3-230
1
I
1
with mutual respect from all parties. The sound engineer has been both courteous and
professional. Measurements from this site show that the bobsled can be heard at that location.
The "signature" of the ride was shown to me and recorded in the data. However, testing from
this site has been limited and follow-up sessions this fall have not had the opportunity to
gather additional readings on the Bobsled. because it was not running at those times (e.g. a
test was attempted Oct 22). Further, preliminary tests do not reflect or consider the conditions
of wind change, time of the year or unusual lake and non -lake related activities. Will the
Planning Board require further noise/sound testing before it accepts a completed GEIS, and
will the public have the opportunity to review these new data and make comments before a
GEIS is accepted?
Mitigation and Thresholds for Noise Pollution: Will reduction of hours of operation be
considered as a noise mitigation tool? Will the regulation of hours of operation for certain,
community -defined nuisance rides or noise producing events or shows be considered? Will
the Planning Board in evaluating this DGEIS consider subjective evaluation of nuisance
noise? Will the Town of Queensbury consider a reasonable "Noise Ordinance" and will the
affected neighborhoods, including Glen Lake, have input into this process?
Apart from the Alpine Bobsled, noise from the Great Escape has not been a problem or an
issue to this point in time. Occasional screams or background sounds have not been
bothersome. The problem is The Bobsled, and the noise from The Bobsled is not a problem
because of decibel levels: rather it is a problem because of the routinized and repetitive low ---
frequency rumble from that particular ride. Frankly, if the Great Escape had removed this
ride or stopped the noise pollution, resistance to development would not be so intense.
However, since the Great Escape position has been resistant to community needs, then the
only reasonable noise threshold should be a zero -tolerance threshold. We should not have to
hear any audible sounds from The Park. Only if the Great Escape can effectively mitigate the
noise from The Bobsled or any similar noise producing ride or event at The Park should a
compromise position be entertained. Will the Planning Board require the Great Escape to
either remove or shut down The Alpine Bobsled or effectively mitigate the noise pollution
problem before or as a stipulation to acceptance of a final GEIS? If not, why not?
Visual Impacts
The proposed 200' high ride (see exec summary, 4-24) is unacceptable. The picture taken
from the bike path at the Glen Lake inlet absolutely shows that this structure will be visible
and out of character with the aesthetic character that currently exists. The view from the bike
path and the lake towards West Mountain and areas west are stunning and remarkably
pristine. It would be a shame to disturb this atmosphere. Before I moved onto the lake, prior
to 1993. I would intentionally ride to that place on the bike path just for the view. It is a
calming scene in a hectic world. Don't destroy it. Further, Great Escape gives NO alternative
mitigation plans (other than a no action plan) and does not tell us how many 200' or other
similar rides or structures will be needed to meet expected demands. This is just
unacceptable. No matter how the Great Escape tries to justify this, the impacts upon the
residents are assured. Perhaps such a ride should be placed in the front of the Park along
Route 9. Or perhaps other alternatives should be considered. For example, could the Park
Areas be rezoned to allow amusement and entertainment in Park Area C along and near Route
9 and away from residential areas? This could theoretically reduce both visual and noise
impacts on nearby residents. It is also reasonable to apply the slippery slope argument here.
If thrill seekers need 200' foot rides this year, why not 300' next and 400' two years later. It
would be more appropriate if the thresholds were set now. I suggest that the existing tree line
be the upper height threshold for all structures at the Great Escape. Other alternatives besides
height should also be considered in Planning Board decisions. The Town should be wary of
so-called thrill rides that ring an entire Park and send off shock waves and loud noise to
stimulate the crowds. Will the Town consider noise studies, height requirements, and the
5 3-231
purposes and functions of any ride during the site plan review process before it is allowed in
The Park?
The wetlands and water bodies in the vicinity of the Park afford open spaces and scenic vistas.
How will the development proposals and future rides maintain the visual quality and fit in
with the existing rural and natural character of the area?
Will the development take into consideration potential removal of trees and vegetation on,
near and along Rush Pond, the Glen Lake Brook and the Glen Lake fen, which would impact
the visual as well as the aquatic quality?
Do the Economic Benefits really outweigh the Environment and Public Risks?
t
The Great Escape's main argument to allow development is the economic contribution the Park
will have on the area. No one denies that The Park makes money and employs people, services and adjunct
businesses. However. some perspective on this issue is necessary. At projected levels of full development
and with attendance increases to 1.5 million, property valuations from the Great Escape are estimated to
grow to $25.7 million. Comparatively, property values for Glen Lake residents exceed $45 million. It
appears then that property taxes from Glen Lake far exceeds that of the Great Escape, and further, more
than half of Glen Lake residents pay school taxes to Oueensburv. while the Great Escape pays none to
Oueensburv. Recognize also that if Great Escape development causes Glen Lake property values to
decrease, then tax revenues to the Town will also diminish. Will the Planning Board make the Great
Escape revise the GEIS to reflect these comparative numbers and potential lose of property values in the --
surrounding neighborhoods caused by the growth of and negative environmental impacts from the Great
Escape? And will the Great Escape be help legally responsible for decreasing property values caused by its
expansion and environmental impacts? Will the Planning Board stipulate in the GEIS that the Great
Escape must ensure local, neighborhood residents that if in fact resident's property values decrease or do
not increase at comparable levels that the Great Escape will fully compensate individuals for their losses?
If not, please explain why not? It seems that if the Great Escape is confident enough to claim that "The
Project will not have adverse visual or audible noise impacts on the community and the residential
neighborhoods within the study area" and that there will be no causal relationship between growth in visitor
attendance and the corresponding levels of general Park operations as contemplated by the proposed
Project and negative environmental impacts (see the executive summary), then the Great Escape should
also be willing to give insurance to the adjacent neighborhood residents. in case they are negatively
I
impacted. That is, if the Great Escape does not hold up its assurances. then they will be held legally
responsible and fully compensate residents for losses and diminished values. Such a stipulation seems
reasonable, and I believe such an agreement would do much to mitigate much if not all of the concerns by
local residents. However, this would likely require an agreement by legal contract between all affected
'
parties, and such an agreement should be done prior to or in conjunction with acceptance of the GEIS. Will
the Town Planning Board stipulate to such an agreement?
Respectfully,
au Derby
' 86 Ash Drive
Lake George, NY 12845
(518)761-7015
1
6 3-232
1 UNI ECO-STONE
NEW TECHNOLOGY
The UNI ECO-STONE"' paver, an exclusive product
to Unilock, is an innovation in environmental paving
systems. In comparison to conventional pavements,
this unique and aesthetically pleasing design allows
surface water to quickly filtrate through the funnel -
shaped openings.
ECOLOGICAL
The public has become more conscious of the
environment and the damaging effects of non -
permeable pavement surfaces that impede the
replenishment of the water table. The
UNI ECO-STONETM system assists in the preservation
of the environment by allowing rain water to flow
'through the pavement surface directly to the ground
water table.
' APPLICATION
The UNI ECO-STONETM 8 cm. paver can be installed
in a variety of residential and commercial
'applications. The UNI ECO-STONETM system's
Ecological, Economical, and Installable benefits make
it a superior pavement. This paver system, unlike
conventional pavements, can be trafficked
immediately after installation. Because the Eco-stone
paver is a segmental paving system, access to
underground services is easy and inexpensive.
ECONOMICAL
The installation of the UNI ECO-STONETM water
permeable paving surface does not require the use of
sewer and drainage systems as compared to
conventional pavement surfaces. This benefit can
'translate into significant cost savings to both the
environmental and the completed project.
I INSTALLATION
TM
The UNI ECO-STONE MECHANICAL
INSTALLABLE paving stone provides further cost
savings. The inherent shape of UNI ECO-STONETM
optimizes interlocking capabilities and when installed
in the herringbone pattern will maximize the
performance of the pavement.
The funnel shaped water inlets are filled with a
specific gradation of sand and gravel resulting in a
relatively smooth pavement surface for both
Thickness
is cm.
LO
a.D4
23 cm
Contact your nearest Unilock Office for
complete installation specifications.
pedestrian and vehicular traffic. �C(�,�`� TM
Member UNI Group
Unlocks Chicago Inc.
Unilock® Inc.
Unilockm Limited
Unilock9 Michigan Inc.
Unilock11 New York Inc.
301 East Sullivan Road
510 Smith Street
287 Armstrong Avenue
12591 Emerson Drive
Terravest Corporate Park
Aurora, Illinois 60504
Buffalo, New York 14210
Georgetown, Ont. L7G 4X6
Brighton, Michigan 48116
Brewster, NY 10509
Tel: (708) 892-9191
Tel: (716) 822-6074
Tel: (416) 453-1438
T
Tel: (914) 278-6700
Fax: (708) 892-9215
Fax: (716) 822-6076
Fax: (416) 873-2366
1 3 — 2 3 3
Fax: (914) 278-6788
PRINTED IN CANADA 0 Unilock 19911PM1M
U
I
I
11
n
Invisible Structures, Inc. family of other products for site improvement.
New Britain, CT
Worcester, MA
Orchard Park, NY
Fairfield, NJ
250 Stanley St.
265 Southwest Cutoll
3605 California Rd.
160 Fairfield Rd.
(860) 225.7671
(508) 767.0200
(716) 667.3355
(973) 227.1600
Williston, VT
Warwick, RI
Plattsburgh, NY
Portsmouth, NH
20 Adams Dr.
75 Jefferson Blvd.
63 Trade Road
255 West Rd.
(802) 863.3302
(401) 785.0113
(518) 561.2525
(603) 436.3833
Chicopee, MA
Latham, NY
Syracuse, NY
Augusta, ME
317 Meadow St.
55 Sicker Rd.
6424 Taft Rd.
26 Leighton Rd.
(413) 535.0248
(518) 785.3276
(315) 452.1080
(207) 622.0821
Medfield, MA
Newburgh, NY
Yonkers, NY
Portland, ME
10 West Mill St.
15 Little Brook Lane
1000 Saw Mill River Rd.
659 Warren Ave.
(508) 359.7321
(914) 566-4040
(914) 964.0101
(207) 775-5764
A.H. Harris
& Sons, Inc.
Boston, MA
425 Dorchester Ave.
AM
I a
(617)269.4800
H
CONSTRUCTION SPECIALTIES
tiinrr Jvld
Invisible Structures - Standard Product Roll Sizes
Model m ft m ft
m
ft
m2
fts
kg
As
1020 1 3.3 20 65.6
0.8
2.7
20
215
37
82
152 11.5 4.9 20 65.6
0.8
2.7
30
323
56
123
20201 2 6.6 20 65.6
0.8
2.7
40
430
75
164
2520 2.5 8.2 20 65.6
0.8
2.7
50
538
93
205
West popular mil sizes, usually is stack.
Boll sizes narked with asteriaks aboald be installed by lifting a7arh 1a ooly. Allother rolls can be
installed manually (2 peoale advi+edl. Rolla apply to Gmsspave, Gravelpave=, Dramore3, and Slopetam�.
Ctutom roll sizes ev ' by request
20100 E. 35th Drive, Aurora, CO 80011-8160
800-233-1510 • Fag: 800-233-1522
Overseas and locally: 303-373-1234 - Fag: 303-373-1223
www.invisiblestri-filrAR_Com
Patent number 5,250, 3 - 2 3 4 trucitures' Inc
w
CD•EOM
IECA
IIIIHII&MEMBER
1
139 Equinox Drive -
Lake George, NY 12845
October 23, 2000
Queensbury Town Planning Board
Queensbury Town Office
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
Dear Planning Board,
My husband and I moved to the Lake George/ Queensbury area 7 years ago to
escape the noise, traffic and pollution we used to live with in the New York City area.
Ever since Premier Parks has purchased The Great Escape, the very problems we tried to
leave have come full -force to our area. We live in Courthouse Estates and are plagued by
the noise of the Alpine Bobsled Ride, the heavy traffic along Route 9 and the eyesores A
that the Great Escape has created. (Parking lots sprawled all over Route 9)
Expansion of the Park would be a crime. This region is the Southern Adirondacks
and it is known for its beauty and quality of life. The Great Escape does not reflect the
area's respect for the wild and for the landscape. It is one of the ugliest things we are all
subjected to in this area. Making it bigger will worsen the situation. Taking down trees is
criminal ( the plan wants to deforest the land from The Coachhouse Restaurant to the
Samoset Motel). This kind of thing is damaging to the natural sound insulation trees
provide and it is damaging to the area in terms of rain and snow run-off and will destroy
the beauty of the road.
We don't feel that a few minimum -wage summer jobs make this project
worthwhile in terms of the area's economy.
We are the residents of Queensbury. We pay taxes. We work hard to make this a
' beautiful place to live. We oppose the raping of our land. It's bad enough we're stuck
with the Great Escape in the first place. We oppose any kind of expansion. I would think
twice before you give permission to a big corporation to come and destroy our land, our
' lake (Glen Lake), our peace and quiet. The taxpayers and the voters oppose this
outrageous plan.
I
H
1
Sincerely yours,
??_�
S e Delman
1 3-235
I
TOIA"N CF_:;','s2URY
P L M, lN 11"I G IC
L"_77
le-"r /,� 7- / I —/
! i
�..4Gi:o �� �C_ Gf ���'GS��<� � '/-G�j�r-=c � r 147,
/ • ri J s'l c j r /.r / c c: ( �� �1 'ems t--� �(�-r-�� /I/(� / ��' `'T'
7
L
i
ti/'r12 mac' 134�5.t 6 41
<c A 7 L f ! LlNl t.� Aix
Gc W dtn•C Aa ti c-., `- leklr Z R /q
�� c�� TC ��..��., ���,.�-. is 1 C,� �-f_• ��<<� �.�:�
Al
M � ?mac- c ,�1 ,�'7)� y� �•-�'.`_ ✓�``f�-
C `Lj �IZf / �j/✓ Y! -ram e(iGL' P
M c ��
ai ,C.c Leo
�■ . U'l�� ft `� — l � /ttr�i '�� zes ��- � C /� ice« � i2r �••+ �' ,r1-�� fir_ 1'
RECMNED
I
H
F
k
F
3 Benmost Bur Lane
MIT ? ^ Z000
TOWN OF CU , '
PLANNING UPCE
Lake George, New York 12845
October 23, 2000
Queensbury Town Planning Board.
Bay Road.
Queensbury, New York 12804
Dear Members of the Queensbury Town Planning Board.:
When giving any thought to the situation regarding the Great Escape's
DGEIS, the key word which makes it simple to summarize is frustration.
Let's take a moment to review Webster's definition of this word:
Frustration- 1. the state of being disappointed; thwarted 2. a feeling of
dissatisfaction often accompanied by anxiety or depression, resulting from
unfulfilled needs or unresolved problems
After looking at this word as it is defined, it clarifies the reaction to the
Great Escape's proposals. As a 30 year resident of the Glen Lake
neighborhood, there has never been a time that my family and I did not fear
the actions of the Great Escape. Today, despite many long, tedious, crowed,
sometimes hostile meetings, this fear never seems to be alleviated. However,
optimism must be maintained for there is far too much to loose if there is
vanished hope.
The history is complicated, and there are far too many situations to mention.
However, at this point in time it is imperative to focus on my most vital
concern, which is with the years of allowances granted to the Great Escape.
In the days of Charles Wood the status quo resulted in tremendous violations
with minimal fines and no changes. Most of the time he would complete a
project, pay a fine, and all was said and done.
1 One of the most blatant and recent examples involved the clear cutting and
grading changes along the north end of the Route 9 property, which follows
' 3-239
M
up the Glen Lake Road. I clearly remember these changes being discussed
and the reprimands made regarding this action. Promises, many promises,
were in turn made that this would NEVER become a parking lot due to the
environmentally sensitive area. In short, some how, some way with the
foundation laid by Charles Wood, Premier Parks found the legal loopholes; a
parking lot, paved no less (oh sorry — not paved just a dumping area for paved
material) exists along the Glen Lake wetlands.
What is the point of citing this one out of many situations that ring similar
alarms? The point is the grave concern that the future will be just more of
the same. Is this what we are to expect? The town can write volumes of laws,
rules, expectations, limitations, or whatever; however, the key question is
this: When it is time to actually enforce all of what is about to be generated,
will there be any enforcement and consequences that will be true deterrents
to unacceptable actions on the part of this company or any violator for that
matter? With the citation of this one out of many situations, does one
question why the word frustration comes to mind?
Here we are again with a DGEIS written by experts who were paid by the
Great Escape. This ponderous, multi volume set which has been proven to be
filled with misleading legal jargon, unfounded facts, and skewed surveys and
statistics may become the new guiding light. I find the findings, which were
suppose to reflect the good faith of Great Escape and their proclaimed
concern over the environmental impact on the surrounding area, to be
alaxzningly appalling. If these distortions are what they want this community
to believe and buy into, all must prepare for the worst of any possible
scenario that could evolve from the continued existence of this company. Let
me just cite at least twelve blatant examples:
1. Calculations of storm water run-off were based upon erroneous data
and are not valid;
2. Claims made that there would be no impact on the community services
(police, ambulance, road maintenance, etc.) were unfounded and never
researched properly;
3-240
3.
Omission of the adopted 1999 Glen lake Watershed Management
Plan and how it is applied in the proposal is a negligent action;
4.
Decisions on acceptable levels of noise based on flawed noise studies
are redundant (the bobsled ride) and unacceptable;
5.
claims made that this parr as it is or was predates the residential
neighborhood is a false justification to allow for amusement growth;
6.
Failure to recognize any negative economic impacts is an example of
an infallible arrogance;
7.
Failure to identify the changes made to the park from a simple, quiet
children's parr to a multi million dollar adventure park with rides
designed to maize people "scream" is inconceivable;
8.
Failure to properly document alternatives to mitigate impacts as
'
required by SEQR law is irresponsible;
9.
Failure to analyze the effects of run-off into the watershed which is
icaused
by the increase of 600,000 patrons traveling to the park in
motor vehicles is unacceptable;
10. Failure to adequately address the traffic impacts on secondary
roads and patterns and how this will impact on the surrounding
neighborhoods is unethical;
11. Failure to examine the impact of special events and operation of
the park beyond the current Hours is distressingly tmimaginable;
12. Failure to identify the impact this will have of the endangered
species in the wetlands (fen) is pitifully shameful.
I believe it was Mr. Collins who said that the proposed changes would have a
"minimal impact" on the surrounding neighborhoods. T6 was after a
presentation of the proposed 200 foot screamer roller coaster which
WOULD be seen and heard from nearly the entire Glen Lake neighborhood,
which is my no means made up of the number of homes that was implied in
the Great Escape's maps and DGEIS statement. Asa matter- of fact, the
, Glen Labe waterfront properties were assessed at $45 million in 1998. If
they drop in value by 50% due to gross mismanagement, allowances and lacer
of enforcement, the revenue loss from a reduction of assessments of $22.5
million will exceed the total property tax revenue from the Great Escape.
a
1
3-241
4
H
n
r
Bottom line — money talks. This was the mindset of the Great Escape when
they penned this atrocity and tried to mislead the public with the "experts'"
paid advice. It is quite clear that they want it all — despite what is good for the
environment, the neighborhood, the community and the economy. At one
time I was an advocate for this business. This is no longer the case. My
frustration has pushed my opinion over the edge. Premier Parks made a
serious, erroneous error in assuming that they could construct another Six
Flags Park in this neighborhood. This was THEIR "great mistake" not
ours
I sincerely pray that you as the responsible members of our community who
will make the ultimate decisions for our future will weigh the long-term
effects and greatly restrict the actions of this company. The Great Escape's
DGEIS - an insincere, misleading document - is an ominous sign. May this
festering frustration come to an end with your decision to limit the growth of
Premier Parks so that the quality of life in Queensbury, New York will be
her continuing asset.
Thank you for this opportunity and the extended time to respond to the
DGEIS.
Sincerely,
&-dalark Whitty
' Glen Lake Resident
cc: Don Milne
Glen Lake Association President
3-242
Chairman, Town Planning Board _ _ October 23, 2000
Queensbury Planning Board —
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, N Y 12804
Dear Mr. Chairman;
1 I would like my comments to be a part of the record regarding the Great Escape DGEIS
submittal.
I have lived off Glen Lake for the past 15 years and have noted the gradual encroachment of
issues that are generally referred to as Quality of Life.
When we first moved here the amusement park was a part of the background, a place to take the
kids to and an occasional traffic hassle but not much more.
We are now looking at the effects of unplanned growth along the Rt 9 corridor and the
cumulative impacts of adding one attraction at a time and the gradual degradation of the Quality
of Life that the town of Queensbury so heavily relies on in it's promotions.
When I was a member of the Warren Co Planning Board I was asked to identify a priority issue
1 that should be considered by the board, I chose the pedestrian traffic at the entrance to the Great
Escape as one of my major concerns.
H
My biggest fear was that one day an 8 year old would be waiting on the west side of Rt9 and,
being fascinated by the sounds and sights right in front of him (or her), step in front of a Mack
Truck.
This issue was agreed upon by the board and a motion was passed to deny any application by the
Great Escape that did not include mitigation of the pedestrian / vehicle conflict.
After a non conforming submittal by the Great Escape was denied by the board Mr Collins and
his staff attended the next meeting and offered a stop gap measure to control traffic using Flag
Persons. The Board and I agreed that this would be an acceptable solution for the one submittal
but would still leave that 8 year old at the mercy of heavy traffic on Rt9. Additional work would
be done -by the Great Escape to address the agreed upon risk
I have since had private correspondence with Mr. Collins regarding the quality of the training
provided to the flag persons and their supervisors, it does not appear to be a priority for the Great
Escape.
Why does the town not require that the identified hazard, unsafe pedestrian access, be resolved
before any other issues are allowed on the table? The overpass bridge or other remedial action
will be in place with or without the expansion, it's just a question of whether or not some one
has to get hit by that truck first. Including the bridge as a part of the expansion package is the
1 3-243
' same as holding year that 8 old hostage.
g
The second issue is noise. The removal of trees and earth that has already taken place has
increased the noise levels at my house.
Before the banks were removed we would hear a variety on sounds from the North Way and Rt
9, they would come and go as weather conditions and traffic changed. We would frequently hear
the Animal Land lion roar after getting lucky with a Lioness. This was noise but on a very low
key.
' The noise emanating from the Great Escape is frequent, routine and predicable, as heard from
my back yard. It is not a question of intensity as it is not loud. But it is intrusive, mechanical and
' continuous. The Great Escape says that they comply with all standards but there are no noise
standards in Queensbury at this time.
In their submittal they reference OSHA standards that are designed to protect employees from
occupational noise hazards, not neighbonccod noise.
' The textbook definition of noise is "unwanted sound" and the programed noise and mechanical
emanations from the existing Great Escape are all that.
I strongly recommend to the Board that they deny the application before you and further to
require the Great Escape to correct the traffic and noise issues before allowing any further
tdevelopment on this site.
Y�o�rs Truly 1
s- );��
Charles & Lee York
14 Birch Road
Lake George, NY
12804
II
1 3-244
October 23, 2000
iMr. Craig MacEwan
Chairperson, Town Planning Board
Queensbury Town Hall
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, New York 12804
Dear Mr. MacEwan:
IAs a businessman, I realize that the community and business must coexist under
mutually agreeable terms. The Planning Board has the responsibility of making this
happen to the satisfaction of both parties. Since the final determination will have long
lasting effects on the community and future expansion, considerable time must be
taken to assure a viable solution to the many concerns of the community.
My main concerns are the existing highway system and the raising of the existing
parking lot.
On August 15, 00, 1 was returning from a business trip. When I approached Northway
Exist 19, the traffic was backed -up down the exit ramp. I then decided to use exit 20
but soon realized that I had made the wrong decision. The exist 20 traffic was backed -
up under the Gurney Lane overpass. It was 20 minutes before I could get to a point
where I could drive on the road shoulder and exit South on Route 9. Being a rainy day
and 2:30 p.m., North bound traffic on Rte. 9 was also backed -up. 1 was several minutes
before someone would let me turn onto Glen Lake Road.
On rainy days, tourists have nothing to do but shop and this most likely added to the
problem. But tourists will not tolerate this situation and will go to Saratoga or Albany to
do their shopping. This hurts the local businessman.
' On August 16, 1 had a service appointment at Maltbie Chev
y and was late making the
appointment. Traffic on Rte. 149 was backed -up to within YZ mile or less of OxBow Hill.
' Many cars made u-turns, a potential hazzard, to head East. Jim Maltbie stated that one
day the previous week, traffic was backed -up to his business from the light at Rte. 149.
1 do not understand how your group can consider this expansion until the existing
highway conditions are resolved. Adding 100,000 plus cars a day to an already
' overtaxed highway system will definitely hurt this area. You, the County and the State
1 3-245
I
[l
I
must resolve this problem first. Who will shop the Million Dollar Half Mile if you can't
exit the parking lot. Also, truck traffic will reroute along Quaker and Ridge Roads to
eliminate the Exit 20 bottleneck, unhappy landowners.
My other concern is the existing parking lot across the road from the Great Escape.
Charles Wood filled and bulldozed over an existing swamp. That area is so unstable
that the existing pedestrian bridge connecting the two parking lots has almost sunk out
of sight. Raising these lots 5 feet will create additional soil pressure and cause a
reduction in the creek size. If the water flow is restricted, the water level in Rush Pond
will rise or the faster flow of water will cause the migration of silt in the Glen Lake fen.
The treatment of these parking areas deserves serious consideration as it will have a
long lasting effect on the area.
As an engineer, I see many problems in this proposal that must be resolved in addition
to the two that I have mentioned. Being a water and sanitation specialist, I see
possible flaws in the Great Escape proposal, contingencies.
Sir Serely„
J
V'O� e r A. Ry
�g i� a�b t✓ 1 C��.
3-246
11
1
E
I
1
Mr. Craig MacEwan
Chairperson, Town Planning Board
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
Dear Mr. MacEwan:
October 23,2000
I am a lifelong resident of this area and have resided in Queensbury since 1970. My
brother, Dr. Michael Sheehan and myself also own a camp on Glen Lake that has been in
our family since 1945. I am very concerned with the proposed expansion plans of the
Great Escape and in its present format am very much opposed to this project.
Obviously, I have seen a great deal of change in Queensbury and Glen Lake in the past
30 years. It is my opinion that the quality of life has diminished with the economic
expansion that has taken place along the Route 9 corridor. It seems ironic that we have -a
beautiful lake that was created by nature and are placing it in danger to accommodate
expansion plans of a park that is neither locally owned nor controlled. I am hopeful that
our local representatives will have local interests at heart when it comes time to decide on
the direction of the Great Escape's proposal.
It has been well documented by other area residents that the effect of removing trees
along the corridor will seriously threaten the lake itself. As you know these trees are a
natural protector of the lake as it is able to absorb enormous quantities of water and
airborne pollutants found in rainwater.
I am also opposed to the expansion of any rides that will threaten the scenic views from
the lake and will add to the already ugly noise pollution that upsets the tranquility of the
entire area surrounding Glen Lake.
Thank you for your service to our community and I hope that you will continue to make
the tough decisions that have earned my respect for you and your colleagues.
Sincerely,_
Paul Sheehan
23 Sylvan Avenue
Queensbury, NY 12804
3-247
I
I
I
I
11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
zl�c
1 3-249
I
I
I
I
I
I
•
I
I
I
I
d=z?
6�7
P7-7
62
III
lcx)e-y�
1 3-250
35 Dineen Road
Lake George, NY 12845
October 23, 2000
Mr. Craig MacEwan
Chairperson, Town Planning Board
Queensbury Town Hall
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
Dear Mr. MacEwan:
The following comments are made in response to the DGEIS submitted by the Great
Escape for their proposed five-year expansion.
In their draft they state that the environmental impacts are minimal compared to the
economic benefits of their expansion.
' The impact produced by clear -cutting all of the trees from the Samoset Motel property to
the Coach House Restaurant cannot, under any circumstance, be considered minimal. In
addition to the aesthetic impact of this removal, there is a noise impact upon the
neighborhoods of Courthouse Estates and Glen Lake and an enormous impact upon Glen
Lake from storm -water run-off.
' If you remove all of these trees and replace them with paved parking, as proposed, then
all of the rainwater plus the pollutants coming from the cars (gasoline, oil, antifreeze and
other hydrocarbons) will drain into the proposed catch -basins and pass into the
groundwater entering Glen Lake via the Glen Lake Brook. The trees currently absorb
enormous quantities of water and airborne pollutants found in rainwater.
Removal of a considerable amount of soil from this area to add five feet to the lower
parking areas will reduce the natural berm. This berm acts, with the trees, to buffer the
noise from the Northway that reaches the adjacent neighborhoods.
' The aesthetic impact is also important. The scenic vistas make Queensbury a "nice place
to live." Visitors also expect to see beautiful stands of trees along our roadways. This
stretch of Route 9 typifies this beauty.
An alternative is to erect a parking structure on the old Animal Land property to account
for spaces lost by not paving the aforementioned treed area.
Sincerely,
X*&k
Robert DiDio
3-251
1 TO: Members of the Queensbury Town Planning Board
From: Helen P. Stern
12 Greenwood Lane
Queensbury, NY 12804
Phone: 792-2593
Re: Growth v. Quality of Life
Regarding the current DGEIS before the Board, kindly accept this letter as a request for serious
consideration of the following factors before granting approval.
1) Traffic
a.
Traffic problems arise after poor planning and lack of foresight.
i. Miracle Half Mile;
ii. Residential Growth west of 187 (Aviation and Corinth Roads); and
iii. Great Escape.
b.
What are the costs to correct the problems?
c.
How much is it worth, not having to take an additional 15 — 30 minutes each day
to get to work or the store?
d.
Have road rage incidents increased or decreased in this area?
2) Noise
a.
Along US Route 9 north of Miller Hill to Exit 20 noise levels have increased
dramatically.
i. Go -Carts;
ii. Kof C Outdoor Bands;
iii. Great Escape
1. Extended Hours
2. Bobsled Ride
b.
What is the effect of constant noise or repetitive noise on people?
c.
How late should noise be allowed to encroach into our homes and back yards?
id.
Should residents have to close their windows and become prisoners in their homes
to avoid noise?
ia.
3) Quality of Life
What are the benefits of living in a community that is prospering, if it is
unpleasant to drive in the community and you cannot enjoy a peaceful afternoon
in you back yard?
Please consider the above before you grant anyone approval to enlarge their operations or expand
their business hours.
' 3-252
4-et
)VY.
' � CCU �t.r .may/ �Gd
-Inc. cfa�
L—
Ul
/UY. 12-804
&
kL
e- 16 le A-' i) S
' ' (I1� Ct' V c �a tzA -fkd-t 4 � ej i vt
40
4L Let- c a iL% i
jb{
e j, V ►2rn rx-t he rq c-i- k eU-,e- Ci /L-L q- . -i,4e- "LLI-�76WLic- Pde/ P C (I t�4x
�LV-
C`'ffc�.,�.5 . I��F-E��L�yGk CG�x2� �b tl.� t�dcrz)�duL,Ns/Qu�c'X]S -
iv- rYlct iL
. �.tL�.� / Lk G eL•t���.�.
I f e CCY Es C O-ft—
' � � Qcc_.e�e ns ,6cc cn Cal�.�c.. �Q lc-c.
I c
q-k-j-
e L Cc, —Li L i w-f a 4 /S e- a-fi—
'tc - 6 )(Lt 5 It a-,r-
Lk, v' a -,I- cm ?-;L
j
tCc (/ �c J c L i 2 .� �'l� L,� Gz� cc f -Y c Lc_s C�-.� .bi cs fc.t -S S t, ;L 44-L 6z- ve a-
-fkL
3-253
0
o
GL �� -2Lft� /�./ C1 � '�-f1. ��' !�1 _ GL' l l � lr! �S yet c�z� •�_ n CE If-C i..l c��- t � c l.�-C cZ,t �L
S�5 ��-�'� a ti�� cUCtcc_ SeC�e�l �cC,L cA/ ;o blentS �/ cif �S
(i C
' ct ut cC l z.-c. k , 4 rc e-.� a bs c b a r r 2 & c�- cv a t-( f v llu -tel-& �a
1 rt (L et vI
tY S LYl i[ af&U's I n e-'S s 6 recces � S � tt� aces r7 d-f
i
ftd LC. c, /4
' e ✓) �� � L r \ Yl L-� w �i LCJL CL GC n �- Q � r ..
CC CL_ C i ►td-C" 6 S C d� � c k- - ( ri e
�LLL �1F Gy Q C C_ Q. ' (/SO bon
� b� C ��C.S , � �e�ru.c7�'
�V AY , icrLCS�L-
/'e-ra__j C.5 C 4L4� I s b G� !� tom. / /1 dZ et e CL
rzx r� •x,(' C
4tv- g- -e e I) s b CL
t U .
tcm-
to cnc.EeC t&dt-Lye— �.t,cr�e,� m a�,�v-� �'� �. , 6LL,LL,4tT6L-*"Lr
-
��
' �. k . � �� L •E2ti� ti - -f i� �c c.-•-e.. ✓ /I �� .�iat t�c_c_.- �� c'Z iL � I'
' cei,C.r
f
F
1 3-254
n_
P
r
H
Citizens for Queensbury
P.O. Box 4883
Queensbury, NY 12804
October 24, 2000
Queensbury Planning Board
Town Hall
Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
Re: Comments on DGEIS for Great Escape Theme Park
Dear Planning Board Members:
0
44... the substantial economic and fiscal benefits from the `expansion' Project and growth in Park
attendance far outweigh its minor and insignificant adverse impacts, and that all potentially
adverse impacts from the Park's expansion have been mitigated or avoided by the Project
Sponsor to the fullest extent practicable." So concludes the Executive Summary of the Draft
Generic Environmental Impact Statement (DGEIS) for Great Escape Theme Park. (Italics are the
author's.) We believe this self-serving statement must be subjected to intensive scrutiny and
thorough review. We also believe that the last part of the statement describes something that can
only be determined by you, the Queensbury Planning Board. In an effort to assist you in your
deliberations, we offer the following comments.
Who are we? We are the Citizens for Queensbury Steering Committee, a group of common
citizens attempting to diligently pursue issues important to maintaining Queensbury as a "nice
place to live." In pursuit of this mission we will bring several factors to your attention and raise
certain questions concerning the subject document and the project it addresses.
First, we want to recommend you carefully study the several thought -provoking letters from
individual members on specific sections of the DGEIS. These include those from Karen
Angleson, Roger Boor, Joanne Bramley, Don Milne, Don Sipp, George Stec and others. They
present well thought-out analyses of some of the more controversial and contentious sections of
the document. They address concerns of the neighbors, potential impacted users of the Route 9
corridor and other Queensbury residents. They address possible short- and long-term negative
impacts on residents, tourists, the environment and the future growth of the Town of Queensbury.
Their comments and concerns deserve rigorous consideration by you, the members of the
Queensbury Planning Board.
Second, we want to suggest certain steps that must, we repeat, must be taken before any
expansion of the Park's amusement activities is considered. These include, but are not limited to,
the following:
• All required infrastructure construction relating to future growth such as traffic
amelioration, parkina. pedestrian crossings including overpasses/underpasses
3-255
k,
C
r
F
and traffic lights, plus wastewater control (including a connection to the Glens
Falls treatment plant), lighting, stormwater management - be completed and paid
for by Great Escape;
• Establishment of guidelines for the height of future attractions and buildings that
recognize the need to obtain area variances for any such structures (as defined
in the proposed new zoning ordinance) that exceed the 40-feet limit of the RC-15
zone;
• Codification of noise limitations — e.g., 60 dBA at all property boundaries; limit on
hours of operation not to exceed the current closing hours of 8 PM on weekdays
and 10 PM on weekends with the understanding that special events must
comply;
• Parking lots must be permeable and landscaped and not employ so-called
"festival parking" while tree removal on the hill from the Samoset Motel to the
Coach House be limited to the construction of the so-called "ring" road;
• Consideration be given to the construction, with minimum loss of trees on the
west side, of a parking garage on the property that previously supported Animal
Land;
• Noise impact from the Northway be mitigated as much as possible for residential
neighborhoods in proximity to Great Escape; and
• Careful attention must be paid to the traffic flow pattern projections of the New
York State Department of Transportation, including expert review and a
determination that traffic flows are satisfactory. This review should also include
consideration of pedestrian and bicycle traffic.
' Third, we would like to cite one reference that demonstrates how the identified concerns and
effects on surrounding neighborhoods are summarily dismissed in the DGEIS. For example, in
the first paragraph in Section 3.6.1 Sound, reference is made to the fact that his section
' "...discusses the existing "acoustical environment" of the 'receptor neighborhoods' ... and the
lack of significant accumulative impact of the Park's current operations on the "receptor
neighborhoods"." We have heard from many residents in the "receptor neighborhoods" how their
' lives have been adversely affected by the Park's current operations and yet the DGEIS dismisses
their concerns with a turn of the cavalier phrase "lack of significant accumulative impact."
' Please do a thorough review of the DGEIS and base your findings on both the facts and also on
how you would like to live next to the Great Escape Theme Park. Also please keep the public
involved in the process. There is no doubt that the- Great Escape Theme Park is an economic
asset to Queensbury and the county. However, they must learn to live here as a good neighbor
and respond well to legitimate concerns.
' Thank you.
Roger Boor
' Vice President, Citizens for Queensbury Steering Committee
1 3-256
10 Benmost Bur Lane
Lake George, New York 12845
October 24, 2000
Queensbury Town Planning Board
Bay Road
Queensbury, New York, 12804
' Dear Members of the Queensbury Town Planning Board:
' It is our desire to register our concerns and objection to the proposed
expansion of the Great Escape. This type of business will have a
serious impact on the local, surrounding environment if it continues
to grow as suggested in the DGEIS statement.
We have been residents of Glen Lake for over 30 years. Our major
concern is the quality of water in and around Glen Lake. This
'
includes the surrounding wetlands. What is alarming us is the lack of
a municipal sewer system. This is imperative for any growth to
'
occur. Of course, allowing the Great Escape to build their own
likely become
would more than a policing nightmare and put our
beautiful lake at a greater risk. Furthermore, the effects of storm
'
water run off from the additional 4500 cars will no doubt enter into
the Glen Lake fen. This is further insured by the planned removal of
'
trees in the watershed area, which is removing nature's design to
prevent this type of damage. It has also come to our attention that
the DGEIS produced by the Great Escape Park is not compatible to
the adopted Glen Lake Watershed Management Plan. It seems as
1
though this plan should have been a key inclusion in the DGEIS.
H
1
3-257
11
I
—2— October 24, 2000
There are numerous other concerns based on noise, visual pollution
and road congestion all of which will have obvious, significant
impacts on the quality of the Great Escape's surrounding community.
Much can be said about each, and although dedication to these
topics seems secondary, they are important issues that should be
carefully considered before decisions are made to allow for this
degree of expansion. A final thought to this is the awareness that if
there were a decline in the property value, there would certainly be a
decline in the taxes as well.
In all fairness to the many families that have settled and invested in
this area, The Town of Queensbury has a moral obligation to provide
and protect the quality of life that brought us here in the first place. -
Please consider this DGEIS carefully and avoid the temptation of the
short-term rewards for this project. As we understand it, all other Six
Flags parks are not located in residential areas or around protected
wetlands or lakes. Please dont let it happen here in beautiful
Queensbury.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Robert and Anne Clark
Glen Lake Residents
Cc: Don Milne
Glen Lake Association President
3-258
11
I
Mr. Craig MacEwan
Chairperson, Town Planning Board
Queensbury Town Hall
742 Bay Rd.
Queensbury, NY 12804
Dear Mr. MacEwan:
The following comments are made in response to the DGEIS submitted by the Great Escape for
their proposed five-year expansion.
In their draft, they state that the environmental impacts are minimal compared to the economic
benefits of their expansion.
The impact produced by clear -cutting all of the trees from the Samoset Motel property -to the
Coach House Restaurant cannot, under any circumstance be considered minimal. In addition to
the aesthetic impact of this removal, there is a noise impact upon the neighborhoods of
Courthouse Estates and Glen Lake and an enormous impact upon Glen Lake from storm -water
run-off.
If you remove all of these trees and replace them with paved parking, as proposed, then all of the
rainwater plus the pollutants coming from the cars (gasoline, oil, antifreeze and other
hydrocarbons) will drain into the proposed catch -basins and pass into the groundwater entering
the Glen Lake via the Glen Lake Brook. The trees currently absorb enormous quantities of water
and the airborne pollutants found in that rainwater.
Removal of a considerable amount of soil from this area to add five feet to the lower parking
areas will reduce the natural berm. This berm acts, with the trees, to buffer the noise from the
Northway that reaches the adjacent neighborhoods.
The aesthetic impact is also important. The scenic vistas make Queensbury a "nice place to
1 live." Visitors also expect to see beautiful stands of trees along our roadways. This stretch of
Route 9 typifies this beauty.
1 An alternative is to erect a parking structure on the old Animal Land property to account for
spaces lost by not paving the aforementioned treed area.
' Sinceml ,
Unt
Queuebury, NReard&Rd.
3', IV1' 12804
1 3-259
Mr. Craig MacEwan
Chairperson, Town Planning Board
Queensbury Town Hall
742 Bay Rd.
Queensbury, NY 12804
Dear Mr. MacEwan:
The following comments are made in response to the DGEIS submitted by the Great Escape for
their proposed five-year expansion.
In their draft, they state that the environmental impacts are minimal compared to the economic
benefits of their expansion.
The impact produced by clear -cutting all of the trees from the Samoset Motel property to the
Coach House Restaurant cannot, under any circumstance be considered minimal. In addition to
the aesthetic impact of this removal, there is a noise impact upon the neighborhoods of
Courthouse Estates and Glen Lake and an enormous impact upon Glen Lake from storm -water
run-off.
If you remove all of these trees and replace them with paved parking, as proposed, then all of the
rainwater plus the pollutants coming from the cars (gasoline, oil, antifreeze and other
hydrocarbons) will drain into the proposed catch -basins and pass into the groundwater entering
the Glen Lake via the Glen Lake Brook. The trees currently absorb enormous quantities of water
and the airborne pollutants found in that rainwater.
' Removal of a considerable amount of soil from this area to add five feet to the lower parking
areas will reduce the natural berm. This berm acts, with the trees, to buffer the noise from the
' Northway that reaches the adjacent neighborhoods.
The aesthetic impact is also important. The scenic vistas make Queensbury a "nice place to
' live." Visitors also expect to see beautiful stands of trees along our roadways. This stretch of
Route 9 typifies this beauty.
An alternative is to erect a parking structure on the Gild Animal Land property to account for
spaces lost by not paving the aforementioned treed area.
Sincerely,
i
34 Reardon Rd. ._ /,
%- (ZL4,0 .
' J
3-260
1
11
3 Sullivan Road
Glen Lake
Lake George, NY 12845
Mr. Craig MacEwan
Chairperson
Town Planning Board
742 Bay Rd.
Queensbury, NY 12904
Dear Mr. MacEwan:
^.'
We have lived permanently at Glen Lake for 52 years and my husband's family
have owned a considerable amount of property here for 65 years. We are concerned
with the need to prevent clear cutting of trees along the route 9 corridor. The
growth of Queensbury and Glen Lake has occurred because it is a very attractive
place to live. People from New Jersey are moving up here because they find New
Jersey over populated and not an attractive place to live.
The Great Escape contends that the environmental impacts are minimal to
economic benefits of their expansion. The almighty dollar is not the only thing to
consider when your board is making their decisions.
We would hope that any changes that are approved by the board are strictly
enforced. This has not always been the case. When the Lake George Campsites
and RV Sales on Route 9 were approved, trees along Route 9 were not to be cut
down. The trees have since been removed and recreational vehicles are lined up
along Route 9.
Please consider the wishes of the local people who have strived to make this area a
wonderful place to live. The noise impact and the drainage problems should be
taken very seriously.
Sincerely,
Jeanne S. Sullivan
3-261
i
I
1
1
1
1
1
7 Oakwood give
xueensbury, NY 12304
October 24, 2000
Planning 3oard
down of ;)uaensoury
Say _Roads
_ueansoury, :Y 12304
fear sir:
I offer the following comments re the Great Escape
expansion. I think it will create more traffic on my street
as ::rivers try to avoid the congestion on Route 9. I also
thinx it will create more traffic along Bay and Quaker Roads.
I understand tiers is a :.ossihility that some housing
3eveloD.ments will be built along Ieadoworook Road and I think
that tnis will result in a lot more traffic congestion as well.
Sincerely,
4/ � "-,
Vl
Norman Enhorning
3-262
I
Dr. and Mrs. Ronald Van Slooten
110 Warren Avenue -
Ho-Ho-Kus, NJ 07423
October 24, 2000 - - -
Mr. Craig MacEwan
Chairperson, Town Planning Board
Queensbury Town Hall
742 Bay Road
Queensbury. NY 12804
' Dear Mr. MacEwan:
My husband and I along with our four (4) children have lived on Glen Lake for thirteen
' (13) years. We relocated here from New Jersey for a better quality of life. We left behind
the traffic, pollution and noise. We have, to our dismay, watched the area populate to
excessive unacceptable proportions. The Great Escape causes the main traffic problems
' on Route 9 along with excessive noise and threatens the water quality of our Lake.
I would also like to comment on the DGEIS submitted by the Great Escape. How can
they claim that environmental impacts are minimal when they want to clearly cut all the
trees from Samoset Motel to the Coach House Restaurant. This will further increase the
' noise level as well and more importantly affect the water quality due to storm water run
off If the trees are replaced by paved parking, the rainwater will carry with it all the oils,
gasoline, etc. into the catch basins, therefore passing into the groundwater entering Glen
' Lake via the Glen Lake Brook.
Our family hopes that you will consider the residents of the town in response to the Great
Escapes never ending requests for expansions and "improvements".
Sincerely,
Dr. and Mrs. Ronald Van Slooten
IRVS:atw
' 3-263
t
SOCT 2 -ilk Luis;
l
TOWN e-_ pia /' QvaJ -
C= .Le_ vrt r
PLAK"^IG C.`=. - -
�s � Ste!e— 3 ol- 0-4— 601a-7 ow%vv
• � d-/J G V � �Gl/ �l b _ --- _
JGG i17i ,% v a t71 Y.� v ��V C��4 ��JGc o'eG�`.
42
,/ ' / "/ `t t ;. 4l �Gj� Cc/`/� �� ✓G Cam+ --- .. ---
1 q /
04.(-�` av ��v�/�/ .li./Te t- a�,,c� e/1 te� ref.
JO e- a// y d e -r/ 2 co y iL t Arc►
. ..9 Q• � cc3'f�J. � /fo0 .t_cf� ou.r a �.�c,� �c/_ �!'G43•—
o,.
k_/4 e.� J
•
3-264
C7
d2e- 2/i, cd4-�c cot
- - - -- -420
-3?
n `
s �
l --
3-265
I
I
SAMPLE LETTER
Mr. Craig MacEwan
Chairperson, Town Planning Board
Queensbury Town Hall
742-Bav Rd.
Queensbury, NY 12804
Dear Mr. MacEwan:
May 22, 2000
The following comments are made in response to the DGEIS submitted by the Great Escape for
their proposed five-year expansion.
In their draft, they state that the environmental impacts are minimal comnared to the economic
benefits of their expansion
The impact produced by clear -cutting all of the trees from the Samoset Motel property to the
Coach House Restaurant cannot, under any circumstance be considered minimal. In addition to
the aesthetic impact of this removal, there is a noise impact upon the neighborhoods of
Courthouse Estates and Glen Labe and an enormous impact upon Glen Lake from stone -water
run-off.
If you remove all of these trees and replace them with paved parking, as proposed, then all of the
rainwater plus the pollutants coming from the cars (gasoline, oil, antifreeze and other
hydrocarbons) will drain into the proposed catch -basins and pass into the groundwater entering
the Glen Lake via the Glen Lake Brook The trees currently absorb enormous quantities of water
and the airborne pollutants found in that rainwater.
Removal of a considerable amount of soil from this area to add five feet to the lower parking
areas will reduce the natural berth. This berm acts, with the trees, to buffer the noise from the
Northway that reaches the adjacent neighborhoods.
The aesthetic impact is also important. The scenic vistas make Queensbury a "nice place to
' live." Visitors also expect to see beautiful stands of trees along our roadways. This stretch of
Route 9 typifies this beauty.
An alternative is to erect a parking structure on the old Animal Land property to account for
spaces lost by not paving the aforementioned treed area.
Sincerely.AL
1 3-266
FILE No . 452 10/31 ' 00 PM 12 :50 I D JOWN OF QUEENSBURY FAX : 518 745 4437 PAGE 2
t
I f t
iF44AJLW� <� C. L.
ul
TOWN D" ";L:_•ENSB RY
PLAN IF011G OFFICE
S
Pr r
111,1111111 r I
3-267
11
0
FILE No .452 10/31 ' 00 PN 12 : 51 I D JOWN OF QUEENSBURY _ FAX : 518 745 4d.37 PAGE 3
a-
v� r
lll��llIJJJ /
69Z-£
ro
l
r"D
LIM r2p���
v61
r
17 39Vd L€ SbL 8TS Xti3 Jl mSN33no JO NM01=QI TS:ZT Wd 00, T£/OT ZS!7'°N TH
' FILE No.452 10/31 '00 PN 12:52 ID:TOWN OF QUEENSBURY FAX:518 745 4437 PAGE 5
13
{� J
I'Wi� lr1/1sf71�f1 p bT
tarL avA
7tkc,
L'
CVlk
- - �� ,4
1 3-270
I
FILE No.452 10/31 '00 PM 12:52 ID:TOWN OF OUEENSBURY FAX:518 745 4437 PAGE 6
7
I
C
L
I
r
RA
PApr::
K f PE 1ram
--- �9 E
Aim f� PE
VT
Ate
Ate
ITPA
VLL
"T 3-271
n
H
C!
k
FILE No.452 10/31 '00 PN 12:52 ID:TOWN OF QUEENSBURY FAX:518 745 4437 PAGE 7
C1fi
Nc
3-272 `�I`
Oct. 25 2000
Queensbury Town Planning Board
Queensbury Town Office Building
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
Dear Mr. Chairman
On the following pages are my comment ,concerns and questions regarding the Great Escape
DGEIS.
I hope that when the answers to these any other questions by other citizens are completed
that they will be made public and citizens will able to comment on them and also the final
EIS.
Donald P Sipp
3-273
ALTERNATIVES AND MITIGATION
1- Remove only enough of the trees and hill in the area of
the Samoset to the Coachouse to allow for the ring road and
toll plaza.
2-Leave the trees and hill in the rear of the old Animal Land
property,
3- Complete all infrastructure at Great Escape cost. This
would include Sewer hooked to the Glens Falls sewer plant,
all new traffic lanes, traffic lights, overhead walkway.
When these items are in place the project would continue
with sight plan review for each new step.
4- Build a parking garage. Cost should not be a factor in pro-
tecting area from harmful noise.
5-Use of sound barriers to decrease noise from Northway,
K
3-274
I
10-From the DGE/S page 4-23 (bottom of page) " section
3.6.1 .. sound levels have remained unchanged..." This
statement is completely FALSE when related to Courthouse
Estates. Aug. 29, 1990 show Leq of 50.2 and 50.2 dBA for
Courthouse, while Sept. 6, 1999 shows Leq of 56.6 dBAs, an
increase of 6.3 dB over 1990. A significant increase!
11- The soil under the future Green parking lot is unsuited
for a parking area. Will this area receive more fill? Where will
the storm water from the Green parking area drain to?
ECONOMIC
1- The assessed valuation of Courthouse, Twicwood, and
Glen Lake is over $71 million dollars. If expansion causes a
decrease in real estate values, will the increased sales tax
and real estate taxes make up the difference?
2-lf there are not enough workers in the area at present( ads
in paper for workers during the season) how much labor will
need to be imported from other areas and other countries?
3-The proposed expansion will mean construction projects
of $16-18 million. Will all ride contracts go to local business?
How much of projects that go out for bid will be done by
local contractors/
TRAFFIC AND PARKING
■ 1-Will car parking be allowed on the west side of Route 9,
■ north of Northland Sports Wear?
2-W/I/ patrons parking in the area south of Martha's be
allowed to walk north on the sidewalk on Route 9 and cross
to the park entrance?
3- What will cause the new gates to the parking areas to be
opened? Will it be a sudden shower, after a rock concert, at
closing time, etc?
1
2
3-275
ENVIRONMENTAL
I
1-Sound from Northway: with the removal of trees and the hiU
from the area of the Samoset Motel south to the Coachouse, and
from the area of the old Animal Land , what will be the increase
in sound levels in Courthouse, Twicwood and Glen Lake? Need
to show a compute simulation.
2-What will be the increase in sound levels from a 200 ft. roller
coaster?
3-From the DGEIS page 3-40 .... "we conclude from our existing
baseline studies.." What is the existing baseline study?
4-From the DGEIS page 3-43 HUD Standards There are NO fed-
ral regulations for noise. A later Federal Standard * sets HODS
goals at 10 dBA lower.
5-From the DGEIS page 3-44 ..." ambient noise levels in the
three residential areas.. do not differ significantly depending on
whether the park is or is not open and operating. Why is there
no footnote or statement that the Bobsled was not operating?
(figure 3-9) ?
6- From the DGEIS Appendix 7 Table 3 Oct 6, 1999 to determine
Ldn... Where is the field data? Was the daytime Leq taken
during park operation? Oct. 6, 1999 was a Wed., was the park
open this day?
7- As has been the practice at other Six Flags Parks, will Rock
Concerts be held at the Great Escape? If so, what provisions will
be made to control noise, traffic, and behavior of the people
attending?
8- With the increase in attendance, more cars and buses, what
will be the affect on air -quality? Will increased omissions have
an effect on people with respiratory problems? How will the park
monitor these omissions?
9- Will the use of ponds as a storm water control method, allow
a place for mosquitoes to breed? Will the use of insecticides
affect ground water?
' * Code of Federal Regulations, Title 24, Volume 21 Parts 0 to 189,
Revised April 1,1997
' 1
3-276
1
C
To Queensbury Planning Board
Queensbury Town Clerk
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
October 25, 2000
J U
The purpose of this letter is to express our concern regarding the fiuther development of
The Great Escape Amusement Park (GE).
First we would like to mention that we are not opposed to GE developing their activities
especially if this would benefit the town economy and industry. However we think this should be
done with high degree of consideration to the opinions of the neighbourhood as the development
will directly affect the quality of life and the value of the properties of the people living in the
proximity of GE.
The negative effects of the development of GE in our opinion are:
Noise.
Development of several businesses along Rt 9 have during the previous decade reduced
the natural noise barrier against the Northway in a very significant way by removal of trees. The
plans of GE includes also removal of trees between Rt 9 and the Northway. This will indirectly
add to the noise level at the Twickwood residences.
GE has been unsuccessful in its attempts to reduce the noise level of the Bobsled
attraction. No fiu-ther development of the GE should be allowed .before the noise from the
Bobsled has been reduced to an acceptable level. New attractions to be installed should not
exceed a decibel level which could distract neighbour residences.
' Traffic.
During peak hours the traffic along Rt 9 already at present time is very heavy causing
delays and difficulty entering Rt 9 from sideroads. The planned arrangements by GE to improve
' the traffic from and to the GE in the fiiture, when attendance is supposed to be double compared
to the present level, does not appear to be satisfactory. More traffic studies and planning is
required, also addressing the traffic conditions to the south of GE.
' The expansion of GE reportedly will bring a lot of income to the town. It would be very
appropriate for the town to use some of the revenues for projects aiming to reduce the negative
' impacts of the development on the residences directly affected.
' Respectfiully
From the desk of...
' Tor Haggbiom
2 Cedarwood Drive
Glens Falls, NY 12804
tPhone and Fax: 1518 798 0557 E-mail: thaggblom(_g,)adelphia.net
1 3-277
r�
Dr. & Mrs. Hvunk R. Kim
23 Fitzgerald Read
Queensbury, IVY 12801
October 25, 2000
Mr. Craig MacF_wan
tChairperson.
Town Planning Board
Queensbury Town Hall
'
742 Bay Road
Queensburv, NY 12804
I
I
Dear Mr. INlacFwan,
We are writing this letter regarding the plans before the Board for the expansion of the Great
Escape Amusement Park.
As residents of Glen Lake for the past twelve years and of the Queensbury area for the past three
decades, we have witnessed huge growth and change. While much ha
s prol•en to be for the better,
we feel compelled to oppose this expansion due to the aggressive and invasive way the development
seeps to take over and ultimately damage a valuable part of our community.
The addition of the new roller coaster on the back edge of the property will turn what was once an
idyllic mountain lake into the audio epicenter of a "thrill town". Towers supporting {.his
structure will stand where there were once towering trees and ledges. The marshes of childhood
exploration and canoes will lay barren to clear cutting and the run off from crowded parking lots.
We are not opposed to all development and expansion, however, we ask. the Board to carefully
review the environmental impact of the planned expansion and Awgily limit the boundaries and
components of change . Te do not believe that the "economic gains" can justify the loss of one
of our communities quiet treasures.
Thank you for ,your consideration.
S incerely,
Dr. Hyung h. iui
Mrs. Eleonora Kim
23 Fitzgerald Road
Queensbury, NY 1.2866
1
ry
1 3-278
1
Women �5 Clare
James G. O'Keeffe, M.D., FACOG
Nelson L. Miller. M.D.. FACOG
Kathryn T. O'Keeffe, M.D., FACOG
Noelle B. Nielsen, M.D.. FACOG
Maureen Roberts, M.D.. FACOG
Anne S. White. R N.C.. N.P.
Bernice Moeller -Bloom, R.N.C., N.P.
Cheryl Marino, R.N.C., N.P.
Susan Brown, C.N.M.
Donna DePedro, C.N.M. October 25, 2000
Julia Clayton. C.N.M.
Mr. Craig MacEwan
Chairperson. Town Planning Board
Queensbury Town Hall
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
Dear Mr. MacEwan:
IN OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, P.C.
TGh".1 G-:,
mil_ i•a�V
I'm writing this letter in reference to the Great Escape Expansion. I have been a summer resident
of Glen Lake for over 20 years. I certainly understand the need for improvement and continual financial
jobs for the area. but I think this has to be evaluated in reference to long-term environmental needs of the
people who live here. For over 20 years, I've canoed in the water basin behind Great Escape and there is
no question that it is changing. I'm not an expert, but no matter how careful one is, this has to influence
this huge are of wetlands. This needs very careful evaluation, because you have many people who will be
influenced by this decision. 1 understand the need for the Great Escape to run a business, but as a
homeowner I do not feel that the critical issue of this huge water shed has been addressed enough. It
needs to be very carefully looked at. Thank you for your time and consideration.
JOK/pmb
Sincerely,
JameYU'Keeffe, M.D.
Women's Care In OB/GYN
3-279
45 Hudson Avenue, P.O. Box 144, Glens Falls, New York I Z801 • (518) 793-4477
6 Carpenter Lane, Saratoga Springs, New York I Z866 • (518) 583-0020
Diane Tagar9fayes
' - ; •.� 1— : - IJ
.12 Cherokee Lane
Queens6ury, 9VY 12804
= ��
T0W.N' C.'.* •.. •-r� I;PN � Y
_r:,,t�uR t
v' Fn', r�, F
G`
25 October 2000
Queensbury Town Planning Board
Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
Dear Sir,
This letter is in regards to the DGEIS prepared for the Great Escape.
I believe our area already draws thousands of visitors yearly and would not be helped by changing the rural
natural character of our area near the proposed Great Escape expansion. The removal of the trees from the
Samoset Motel to the Coach House will affect in a negative manor.
• The aesthetic value. Patrons of our area come to see our beautiful mature trees, not parking lots and
Hugh traffic jams. They get that at home. If they were traveling to an amusement park then everyone
would expect traffic and acres of parking, but not along our main north, south route 9.
• The noise buffering value. Removal of the mature pine trees will allow Northway noise to travel
throughout the Glen Lake area ( noise over water travels very far), Courthouse Estates and perhaps the
' Twicwood area High noise levels will degrade the quality of life in those areas and decrease the
property values impacting the tax base. I would bet lowering the tax base for Glen Lake area,
Courthouse Estates and Twicwood would have more of a negative effect than an increase in taxes from
any expansion of the Great Escape.
• These old growth trees and the natural lay of the land helps to protect the nearby wetlands and the Glen
Lake fen. Even though the DGEIS states that run off levels, post -construction, will equal that of pre -
construction, common sense tells me this cannot even remotely be true. I say leave those beautiful
stately white pines where they are and let the expansion of the park proceed at a more appropriate level
for a theme park that is immediately surrounded by residential communities. If they cannot expand
appropriately for the area then allow no expansion.
In 1999 the town adopted the "Glen Lake Management Watershed Plan". Does the DGEIS comply with the
current town land use plan in the watershed area? Who will look at this? When will an answer come to the
public? Queensbury citizens are relying on you to uphold existing plans.
' With regards to the 200-foot high ride, there should be nothing above the height of the trees at any point in time.
That means if they remove the trees and replace them with 20-foot tall trees, then the surrounding "rides" should
not be taller than 20 feet. This will preserve our scenic views for all time and help maintain noise levels in
I surrounding homes.
As far as the park pre -dating residential development, my parents moved to Ash drive in 1943 (Mr. Emil Yagar).
There was a community there already. To the west was the Peter Byme family from Mass.: the Tracey family,
the Carters. To the east was Saville, then the house that the Hay family rented, then the Vincent brothers from
Schenectady. Where the Casino was, Mom tells me that was a very small general store or drug store type of
business. Continuing to the east were several more residences. H. Russell Harris improved the road in 1948 or
1949 for the school bus.
The visitors and residents should not have to sacrifice forests, water quality, scenic views, peace and quiet, or
anything else for a corporation that wants to expand too much in too small an area Once again I ask you the
Board, to review this DGEIS with renewed interest, get all the answers and proceed appropriately with any
expansion for the Great Escape.
Sincerely, f�
Diane Hayes
1
3-280
F
98 McCormack Drive
Lake George, NY 12845
518-792-4125
jerawford@consultant.com
Oct. 25, 2000
9 � 4� v«, �av • ',a/, Lw�
Queensbury Town Planning Board
Queensbury Town Office
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
Dear Planning Board,
I am resident of Courthouse Estates and a member of the Courthouse Estates Homeowners
association.
--CN
=URY
I have perused the Great Escape Theme Park Environmental Impact Statement (three manuals) as
well as having read some of the other well -prepared written statements being made by other
individuals.
Rather then being repetitious, I just want it to be known that I am in support of the analysis, the
statements and the conclusions being made by these various individuals. It is difficult to add
further to these well thought-out and prepared documents.
Just a few comments, as I have previously stated, I am not against growth as long as it is done in
a well -planned controlled manner held to a standard that will have minimal undesirable effect on
the physical environment and the quality of life that we all enjoy. It is unfortunate that they are
located in an area that is in a hollow and adjacent to wet lands. But these are the constraints that
they were aware of when they purchased the Great Escape and now they must live and work
through. The wetlands cannot allow to be destroyed. It is a one-way direction, once the wetlands
are affected, it will be difficult to return them to their original state. Your actions are critical in
developing an equitable solution.
I believe that a win -win situation can be attained which will minimize the environmental effect of
noise, traffic and visual concerns to the local residents.
As a planning board of Queensbury residents, we forward to your rational and logical support for
a good resolution, one that can continue to make us proud to be residents of the town of
Queensbury.
Sin
Joha'P. Crawford
Cc: Courthouse Homeowners Association
Don Sipp
3-282
AM 4Z T&.>&r-
i
1
I
1
`1'6 Asti 17r, tee,.
by ica
eroZ6, aacyo
Mr. Cra `9 Hac&AAn
,,6p erson,%o�wn i�ahn% �atra� 'RE �''' i� ED
r -TWn � ,V,�: L�
N 1a�o�
V y TCWN Cr ,.i ; %^BURY
Qvaa,yisIA
Ha_c E ova J
— 7 1 LQS 2 a ►re._ Som ce- c yn me.nd D n ` D GE%.S
caryte� a j 00% p�Z-,�eifin l wa 4� Zoe
hc
ccvn con �v�-f-l�thd a
cl i
�a W �(
S G cis ec Lj4;cA 47160 c�e�er�riAe-- ovr-
CILSe• Q5 C- a �?az:fs rtic/v�% h0 0 an
c)-( q • � nr� , 5 or���KeJ Gc�e�rc�ci b� l
�/ t euJ ' •T ""CA Oy Wilw Svc —It czs
Q I? Cl QS },2 �� 1it � �i � �1 i�i4.
r-hart of f
at -So uh i Po�
av►� Goh certlecl iaf" -7�Q S,1�-� /0ca d
�gf{anc� is hof" Svr �l� f-or- �'l,� lav l of �X h ok
o � a )
Y' • � rvG V h i �%Y'� S I�Dr'!'!7 LJ2%!^ i^Uh - dA
,c f
s arlcfn lops �o61�,eewZ-t-
ftan ��Q
wa;PanC�
c hPaS ec( aMOL,7 �ro
✓� b GkernicaL khV 0
vera
Carbons ahco ar Uh �rmcYchz ?YCI-1� f de
v� ;,0
s
h, fas -- Afs rod� "naaleUa ahw I( �d�Qresse�al? 7
�f not too sfahW-/o (oose fie. �eav �
�a� v�r� ��- mares GLea �al�e S,Dec�at <Qy ct
3-283
- 2 _-
1
I
R
H
F
Paces -for
9':`� lmr'r Gvral fi'54/
) (,da-le'Y' 7uql-,��-
V
-FA, o 1,c7%a�
aria es Gfeh
a c�sr r-ab� lu cer �o I,. v %7,'s cone-er-h /S of
UfMO.S-f tm cr`f-avrL.e- and GonS uencer -/-0 allof
U 5 0r7TK fa % . Tf W0 /nose- -/-Aa wad ( u�/
we- lea ✓o toS e- Q te-24 'c-tz mza ns dos ., 4a- va (uZ- Glint c� � �a v a vc 2v1'fi �e co rnm.�,c.`u'
�QS 1'� t�c`'S /SSv V.e,1'� ✓zr- se-ri aus � . f WfW
lea r-d 4, u h d c a" v� s �.s .
���ecQ �o botic a esf�-� cs uti c� c.vQ �- uQ
1 ' �e.�s ro m .Su
15 44e, ro pO S 42c G v '2 0
f �� f rrios�
4Z 54o rnt wQ'%r ruhoff 1 `tom
ar�,G' (o+s PrV,PCS4P_Cl f-cr Y-g-j- a r-est�) a /oh w
p `�`J �.� ram. C , K a��' f r' 'e s o
s -�� Po W O-rI 1'� - l r W f
��s 2r r� !h'] GTuall.zjoo�(a�dov�G '� � t �,c�ar
sq �[
v,( 'ca h �-e- bea Lt Of s wo v<� �o
J r- Par �4 K 10(S wf f-4 onlel�e
ca m ov (a �a cco rd� hq cvl�af�
a4,0 r K `F� E i �h aGf d fyon ayvvj Po rl"ch�
y :( r wo e- l osf G��.a f' ccl the 'vas
t- - ft'p- ►„�►'n o �' n a l� - �s e- -freescil
�ov� a ar'jqral pn a Si
S vcL as �iea r CJl ,t a.6 o ut re e-va.Iva�i�
�,,,lQ S acts a ro u a f C h e- e,-.;( edl o e-, e�ctz
�o tv p zs a.� a c(vrs u�l
e-
�hSi rreLl-��te- ocu on
145 f-ar as ✓r'-e-Go -V do vlort wak+ to be_
S
¢�1 n a VIGt7.0!y,4a
r p%(¢r coaS rs cr O'{�ter rr�eS rn Aa �' CanrS o f
caho6 o r t-vw60a-t
a �s4rr ��'on -6 keep rt c(OS
bo l o w he I e v-el of i4-0.141s o cov &'Mere. Le_
3-284
I
I
I
�; �Ir►� es o n <<�qqJ ��n5 of rt'de c 1Ix fkr %ours �o a vor'c�
' � -, � � �r' �1'�', rC� �c !� i Sri Pn u
pol fU*OK • - i e-' ,� / "ZJ
r Gf0
o- f -� �q s her ld s on
1 � � cvh cvarci
I u yn - f c�r'►--2G{�v ►mot (,v ��-�an c(
urj a so t�° °�
Ovid
o 4 ca-rvt e� -tlr e r e rf-"
tozd be cac� s Q- S 2 very C cc es o b;►ds �-`�Is fl,
f
l e, f -� o of of 7�� trsfs � r- fire. S-iuctcr r2a...
�� S � • cc re_ fc_jxa_U
Jern 5potec1 �hci r Aearn� ca r'%aV�/o �l h !�
fes / A G�vc� o r- a
�� s�� ate«- • �'` l / II_�s� "�-
r' }� os /I'jG�(JCl! /2 +'tOOG �d YyiQY' 4?n za
tior1� o u��J w�� vn �J. r-
h. y OS re r h ar-�7cu �a r i.s
un d Go vnrnon (oo
0m ,SsAon
v(at-- �r2. a(�'YtoSf dais({y rm SvmrrL .r) tvA4('&l
e:. a Ala Oml�sstck?
Ga pi Oh f GOh G�Vd �- ��taT ��ZQrC C� r2 46411esc
l 'ss�'o hs / k��cl, en c(an eyed 5 ac/'e.s . a vrL
mR �� �o r'Sv fs ��%e os ! ,
In
en d b o p
�d r a ��
h ark S (,cJr % , r p
5 a - on s al -(
54va vt d ea 40 /" G1 v� �z_ W AO (� c
a. bap �•
c� r2
v f G� b S�Z{d cc 1'LQ
rc�(7 .y J
C41L p rop Ovi h+ -�O L a- ),
Ptca)
3-285
UGC-�b-tlFi TMU 15:24 P.el
FJ
0
H
r
Mr. & Mrs. Dana S. Bray. Jr.
15 Twicwood. Lane
Queensbury, NY 12804
October 26, 2000
Quetuawry Planning Board
Queensbury Town Building
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen:
REL- EVED
' T r c00
TOWN OF OUEENSBURY
PLANNING OFFICE
The Great Expansion projected for the Great Escape is the cause of Great Concern
to us. The environmental impact study has been positively slanted in the Groat Emms'
favor. Aside from the increased noise pollution, air poilutran, groundwater pollution and
the tremendous people explosion, we believe that there arc two major issues, which should
be taken in consideration by the planning board.
1. The Great Escape is projecting a million and a half people to visit their pads. At
Saratoga, during the racing seasoa, approximately 950,000 people attenda huge
complex. These numbers at Saratoga have caused all kinds of congestion, traffic
problems, and accidents, and require a huge police force to monitor the comings and
goings of this over 950,000 at the track. The Great Escape wants to increase this
people traffic by an additional 600,000 people. It's just too many people to manage in
a. relatively small area
The management at the Great Escape has shown time after time, that they cannot
adequately manage what they now have. Trey have made numerous promises to quiet
the noise on the Alpine Bobsled Rids. They have not accomplished this. Why should
we believe that tbey would manage the facility any better in the future? This pest
summer, many people complained after visiting the Cleat Escape that many rides were
not functioning. They w= most upset about this and 1= sure management had many
complaints. If they can't manage what they have now, what assurances do we have
that they will be able to manage what they have in the future? The Great Escape's poor
management can only intensify the pollution problems in the future.
For these reasons, we are against any proposed expansion of the Gr=1 Escape, bat if
their program is allowed to go through, the. Planning Hoard should have some checks
and balanc= on nwageatestt's implementation of the new additions to the park.
Ttruly yours, /
--�--� ,
Mr. Bt Mrs. Dena S. Bray. J
1
3-286
u
E
E
E
I �
0
Karen A. Sabo
12 Twicwood Lane
Queensbury, New York 12804
Queensbury Planning Department
Queensbury Town Hall
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, New York 12804
RE: The Great Escape's Expansion DGEIS
Dear Planning Department,
RE E
0
TOWN OF C1.!EENSBURY
P!ANNVMG OFFICE
October 27, 2000
When I think of the Great Escape wanting to undertake such a large expansion, the first
thought that comes to my mind is that they can't handle the problems that the park has
now with it's current size. I have heard from dozens of people who were extremely
disappointed with their visits to Great Escape this past summer. Was it because they
thought the park wasn't big enough, or because there weren't enough roller coasters?
No, they were disappointed because many of the park's current rides weren't operating.
Also, the original Storytown playhouses and statues that we all remember from our
childhood, were run down and had peeling paint. I heard that the food prices were
outrageous, service was poor and that the Splashwater Kingdom changing rooms were
unsanitary. There have been numerous instances of concerts that disturb neighbors, and
the noise issue from the Alpine Bobsled has still not been resolved. There have also been
significant changes in the water quality in Glen Lake and the surrounding wetlands.
Perhaps the Great Escape should concentrate more on the present quality of their
business and their response to their neighbors before they propose to expand so
extensively.
I do agree that the Great Escape is a good business for this area, however, that does not.
_justify sacrificing our town just because they want to grow as large as some of the other
Six Flags. They are bound by critical environmental areas and residential neighborhoods.
Environmental, social and economic factors must be weighed evenly when considering
their proposal. It is your job, as planning board members, not to allow any project to
proceed that can irreversibly harm our town and its residents. A long range master plan
from the Great Escape, with a step by step approach should be submitted, as well as a
thorough study and mitigation evaluation of all of the potential negative impacts.
Ignoring problems and not evaluating them will only hurt the town in the long run.
There are many omissions in this DGEIS and many problems mentioned that weren't
addressed adequately.
3-287
1
n
n
I
H
H
I
11
While reading the Executive Summary of this DGEIS, I also noted manv discrepancies.
The most upsetting one to me was the comment made on page v, that "the Project and the
expansion of the Park are entirely consistent with the officially adopted land use
decisions and objectives of the Town of Queensbury..." The cutting down of the 11.4
acres of mature woods along the Northway, is not consistent with the town's
Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) which states on page 8, Neighborhood 7 under
recommendations, "maintain the existing heavily wooded buffer between the
properties and the Northway in order to maintain the current quality appearance of
Queensbury from the Northway." The vision for Queensbury as stated in the CLUP,
which was prepared with input from citizens and adopted by the town board, lists the
following:
"Planned development with a concern for protection of natural resources,
rural character and visual quality of the town."
"A community comprised of diverse neighborhoods developed in harmony
with economic and environmental factors."
"Government responsive to needs of citizens."
"Citizens playing an active role in the town's decision -making."
Can you honestly say that the currently proposed actions in this DGEIS follow the
adopted Vision Statements for our town?
A serious omission in this DGEIS, is ignoring the noise impact that these proposed
actions would have on nearby residential areas. On page v of the Executive Summary, it
states that according to sound studies performed in 1990 and 1999, "acoustical
environment" and background noise levels in the three receptor neighborhoods tested
(Twicwood, Courthouse Estates and Glen Lake) were within federal noise "guidelines."
Likewise, the recent 2000 sound studies performed by the Chazen Companies, would
also indicate that the Leq from Twicwood and Courthouse Estates would just barely meet
these same federal noise "guidelines" as acceptable, even though the noise is very
disturbing to the residents. However, a residence in Hidden Hills was also evaluated and
was shown to have a much higher Leq than the other neighborhoods, not within the
federal "guidelines", decidedly because of the constant Northway noise. Within the last
year, both Twicwood and Courthouse Estates residents have noticed a significant
increase in the amount of Northway noise audible to them both during the day and the
night hours. If you were to compare Table 3 from the DGEIS labeled, "Day -night
Sound Levels The Great Escape Fall 1999", and Table 5 from the August 2000 Chazen
Sound Study labeled "Comparison of Leq Values by Location and Time of Day", it
would be obvious that there is an increase in both the day and night time Leq's from
Twicwood and Courthouse Estates from 1999 to 2000. The only variable that has
changed over the past year is that more mature trees were removed between the
neighborhoods and the Northway. With the town having this important new information
3-288
I
n
0
H
I
that the noise levels at the Hidden Hills do not show compliance with the federal noise
exterior residential guidelines, the potential impact from additional Northway noise on
the three nearby neighborhoods caused by the proposed extensive removal of trees by
The Great Escape, should be addressed, evaluated and mitigated.
Another omission, on page iv of the Executive Summary, is the assumption by the Great
Escape that the Project will not have adverse visual impacts on the community and
residential neighborhoods within the study area. Not only will the proposed roller coaster
destroy the visual beauty of the Adirondacks for its tourists and residents, but the loss of
the 11.4 acres of trees and removal of the hill near the Northway will eliminate the
quality appearance of Queensbury from the Northway. Replacing those woods with acres
of pavement and a few shrubs and small trees will certainly take away from the
"Adirondack" atmosphere that is currently so picturesque when driving either on Route 9
or the Northway near the Samoset Motel. This area is striving for an "Adirondack
Theme" with architectural guidelines that have been discussed as part of the upcoming
town ordinances. However, "Adirondack" storefronts and businesses are going to look
pretty ridiculous if there aren't any mature pine trees next to them or left in the town.
There is a new generation of vacationers who seek out the dwindling areas of wilderness
and natural beauty that are left, and would rather camp, canoe and hike, than buy into
blatant commercialism. This area draws people from the cities because of its beautiful
forests, lakes and views, and because it doesn't look like a city - yet.
To ensure that the proposed expansion will not cause any visual impact, the Great Escape
should follow the new DEC Visual Assessment Policy titled, "Assessing and Mitigating
Visual Impacts." This policy was adopted by DEC July 31, 2000, and provides in-depth
and up to date guidance for properly evaluating visual and aesthetic impacts generated
from proposed development. Because tourism is such a major part of our town's
economy, and because so many people live here because of the area's natural beauty,
visual impact is a serious concern and should be addressed that way.
What if you approved the DGEIS as it is currently presented? Undeniably, there would
be significant negative impacts, such as increased traffic along major and secondary
roads, a significant increase in Northway noise for nearby residents, negative visual
impacts, wetlands contamination from increased run-off, to name a few. Many aspects of
the town's character would be changed forever. It would not be in the best interest for
our town to give up so much, even if the Great Escape's venture is successful. But what
happens if they are unable to stay in business, either because they can't run their larger
business any better than their current business, or if the economy isn't as good as it is
now in a few years. If there is any kind of a recession, people are not going to be
spending extravagant amounts of money for admission and food at amusement parks.
Please listen to the town's citizens when they ask you to not accept this document as it is
currently presented. The future of Queensbury is at stake.
Overall, I am deeply disappointed in the quality of the DGEIS submitted by the Great
Escape, and by their apparent lack of sensitivity to the community. I sincerely hope that
I
3-289
you, as town officials, wzli take a long range look at this project and try to visualize the
immense impact that some of these proposed actions could have on this town. Please be
cautious with our future and demand better studies and mitigation, so that this expansion
will not take away what we love most about our town. Yes, businesses should be
allowed to expand and grow, but they should only do so responsibly, and with the town's
best interest in mind.
Sincerely,
Karen Sabo
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3-290
H
I
October 27, 2000
Mr. Craig MacEwan
Chairperson, Town Planning Board
Queensbury Town Hall
742 Bay Rd.
Queensbury, NY 12804
Dear Mr. MacEwan:
We, the officers and Board of Directors of the Glen Lake Protective Association
respectfully submit the following comments on the Draft Environmental Impact
Statement submitted by the Six Flags Corporation for the expansion of their Great Escape
amusement park. We ask that they be included in the final impact statement.
We are also enclosing the report from our consultant, Environmental Design Partnership,
containing their comments and analysis of the storm water treatment plan presented in the
DGEIS. Please also include this in the final impact statement.
'
First, the following flaws and gross errors need to be addressed.
1. In their executive summary, the authors of this DGEIS state that, "The project
will not have adverse visual or audible noise impacts on the community and the
residential neighborhoods within the study." While proposing a 200 foot high
rollercoaster within the Park, the authors claim that the structure would have a
'
"negligible visual impact because of the limited areas of view and the visual
context..." This statement defies common sense. A look at their own visibility
maps indicated extensive areas of view on Glen Lake. As for visual context, in
'
our view, the vision of a mountain is significantly altered when one views it
through the gridwork supported a rollercoaster.
To supply some perspective, the CNA Insurance building in downtown Glens
Falls (9 stories) is approximately 96 feet high. This coaster will be over twice as
high.
' The visual impact of this ride is unacceptable in the context
P p of the aesthetic
character in the area. The current view from Glen Lake is of mountains, trees and
1 1 3-291
I
wetlands. Residents and those boating on the Lake will find their view obstructed
by the gridwork of this ride.
Residents, who may not erect homes exceeding 28 feet in height due to their
location on waterfront property should not be expected to be burdened with the
visual impact of a 200 foot high grid of pipes, etc.
The New York State Court of Appeals ruled in the case of Wal-Mart vs.
Lake Placid that a Planning Board might reject projects that adversely
change the aesthetic character of a neighborhood. In our view, the natural
beauty and quality of life in our area should not be sacrificed to erect such a
'
structure for the economic benefit of Six Flags Corporation.
In addition, there is the noise impact of this ride. Six Flags Corp. advertises these
'
rides, in their other parks, as "Screamers." Patrons, thrilled with the prospect of a
sixty -mile per hour descent, scream as they reach the top of such a ride. The
'
noise of their screams will carry directly over Glen Lake.
This is an unacceptable intrusion into the tranquility of the lakeside setting.
tThis
document should only include attractions which do not exceed the 50
foot height of the trees or are placed in a low point in the park which
'
prevents them from being seen from the lake. The document should also
specify if existing trees are replaced with shorter trees, then the height of the
rides should be reduced to that of the new trees.
'
Currently, none of the rides are visible from the lake. (Note: The comet is
located in a low section behind the hill on Birdsall Rd. It has no visual
impact and little, if any, noise impact on the neighborhood of Glen Lake.)
'
2. Their analysis of endangered species is superficial and incomplete. Biologists
from DEC have identified the Blue Kamer butterfly in Park area C. Biologists
'
from Adirondack Community College have discovered endangered species in the
Fen. They should be contacted and their analyses should be included in this
document.
3. Section 3.5.1 (pg3-22), describing land use and zoning, identifies the Glen Lake
neighborhood within the study area as "as group of six or seven homes located
along the southwesterly. portion of Glen Lake about one-third of a mile from ...
'
from the Park." The project location map, Figure 1-1, shows the primary study
area as including not just 6 or 7 properties on Birdsall Rd. (conveniently located
behind the hill), but includes all of the properties from the home owned by Touba
'
on the Northwest shore to Powell on the South shore. This includes thirty-four
(34) homes. In addition, they should have included all residences on Glen Lake
since they are impacted visually, audibly and by the increased nutrient loading of
the waters due to sewage and run-off from the Park. This document should
include all lakefront homes in its analysis.
1 2 3-292
I
4. Errors in the land use section need to be corrected. The document attempts to
minimize obiections raised by neighbors by claiming that the park predates
most residential develooment. In section 3.5.1, the DGEIS claims that the Great
Escape's precursor, Storytown, pre -dates most residential development and has
co -existed with these neighborhoods since their construction. In the first instance,
this is patently false. Buildings on Glen Lake which extend from the old Casino
building on Ash Drive to the homes on St. Mary's Bay near the intersection of Ivy
Loop and Glen Lake Road were almost entirely built prior to 1950. In fact, a
majority of those buildings were constructed prior to 1920. Many of these
structures are owned by individuals who first came to the Lake prior to 1954
and/or their children.
It's true, that the residents of Glen Lake have coexisted with the precursor,
Storytown. Storytown, by contrast, was a very different park than the present day
Great Escape. It featured quiet children's attractions, such as the "Old Woman in
the Shoe" that did not generate significant environmental impact.
There were some conflicts between the neighbors at Glen Lake and the old
Storytown Park. Those conflicts involved water quality issues. Among those
issues were filling in of wetlands and the dumping of pollutants into the waters
surrounding the Park. (The Glens Falls Post -Star reported on 5/25/73 that the
Queensbury Town Board had authorized town attorney David Little to proceed
with "whatever legal action is needed " to get EnCon to stay a permit issued to
Charles Wood to fill in wetlands near Glen Lake. This action was precipitated by
the complaints of Glen Lake residents as reported in the
Tri-County News on 5/27/73.) These problems have continued as evidenced by a
record of field inspection filed by Craig Brown of the Town Planning Department
on June 8, 1998. In this report, it was noted that "drainage from the pavilions was
being directed into the wetlands while the plans show a retention pond. On site
inspection revealed that the piping was being directed into the wetlands."
1 This section of the document should be completely rewritten to be credible.
5. Tree removal should be limited and sharply curtailed from that presented in the
' DGEIS.
In their draft, they state that the environmental impacts are minimal compared to
' the economic benefits of their expansion.
' The impact produced by clear -cutting all of the trees from the Samoset Motel
property to the Coach House Restaurant cannot, under any circumstance be
considered minimal. In addition to the aesthetic impact of this removal, there is a
' noise impact upon the neighborhoods of Courthouse Estates and Glen Lake and
an enormous impact upon Glen Lake from storm -water run-off.
1 3 3-293
If you remove all of these trees and replace them with paved parking, as proposed,
then all of the rainwater plus the pollutants coming from the cars (gasoline. oil,
'
antifreeze and other hydrocarbons) will drain into the proposed catch -basins and
pass into the groundwater entering the Glen Lake via the Glen Lake Brook. The
trees currently absorb enormous quantities of water and the airborne pollutants
found in that rainwater. According to the Syracuse University School of
Forestry, the root system of large trees is the best water and nutrient absorption
system. It has also been documented that the root system of a large tree hold one
to two tons of soil.
Removal of a considerable amount of soil from this area to add five feet to the
lower parking areas will reduce the natural berm. This berm acts, with the trees, to
buffer the noise from the Northway that reaches the adjacent neighborhoods.
The aesthetic impact is also important. The scenic vistas make Queensbury a
"nice place to live." Visitors also expect to see beautiful stands of trees along our
' roadways. This stretch of Route 9 typifies this. beauty.
An alternative is to erect a parking structure on the old Animal Land
property to account for spaces lost by not paving the aforementioned treed
area.
5. The storm water management plan fails to address important issues and is
based upon erroneous data.
'
As reported by the consultants hired by the Glen Lake Protective Association
(GLPA), the soils information provided in the DGEIS was based upon general
information presented by the Soil Conservation Service publication, Soil Mapping
'
for the Waren County Soil and Conservation District.
The soils in Park area C were filled in over wetlands to create parking spaces.
This fact brings into question the validity of using generalized mapping data for
'
the design of a recharge system. According to our consultant, Environmental
Design Partnership (EDP), it would appear that site -specific test borings should be
performed to verify the design... since the largest percentage of the management
system will rely on the soils ability to recharge runoff directly into the ground."
' Based upon design rates for dry wells recommented by NYSDEC, the infiltration
system described in the DGEIS most probably undersized. A review of this data
by EDP is found on page three of their report which is enclosed.
On site testing of the seasonal high water table should be done. The land upon
which the existing parking lots in area C are built is filled land upon which gravel
was placed over wetlands. The water table in those wetlands is at the level of the
Glen Lake Brook, not six feet below the parking lots as alleged in the DGEIS.
1 4 3-294
The DGEIS states that the groundwater will not be impacted because no
excavation will occur below the water table level. The average depth of the
proposed drywells in the plan is nine feet. They are to be placed in the five feet of
fill proposed for area C. EDP reports (pg. 3) that NYSDEC recommends that a
minimum separation of four feet be maintained between the bottom of the
drywells and the seasonal high groundwater in order for the infiltration system to
function properly. They further report that the pipes from the catch basins feeding
the drywells (pg.4) are placed three to four feet below grade. The effective
drywell depth is generally calculated below the invert of the incoming pipes.
Thus the total required depth of the drywell structures should be in the 15 to 18
'
foot range. Given the grading plan presented for area C, it seems that the
existing plan cannot be installed at the depths required to adequately
function. It is suggested that on site seasonal high water table be verified and
the storm water plan be redesigned to accommodate actual conditions.
Since this Park is located in a DEC designated "Critical Environmental Area,"
runoff water quality is a concern. Extended detention basins with water quality
outlets that further enhance the ability of the system to provide treatment of the: -
runoff should be required. EDP reports that extended detention basins can also
be designed to provide management for "first flush" storm events
"Festival" style parking should not be permitted in the plan. Sheet flow
' storm water management in the DGEIS provided for runoff to directly discharge
to existing drainage structures without any type of treatment. Once the parking
lots are paved, water will flow across the pavement carrying all surface pollutants
with it. According to EDP (pg. 5) it would beneficial to provide vegetated buffers
or grassed strips, prior to discharging the runoff.
'
As reported by EDP, the detention and sheet flow portions of the design do not
appear to comply fully with the State and local requirements (See EDP report pg.
5).
Porous paving materials should be used in the construction of the parking lots.
Grasspave and Gravelpave from Invisible Structures, Inc. of Aurora Colorado has
been successfully used in locations Iike the University of So. Alabama stadium
parking lots. Other similar materials should be considered. They are more
suitable from an environmental and aesthetic perspective.
Other issues requiring additional consideration in the DGEIS stone water
'
management plans are listed on pages 6 and 7 of the enclosed report by EDP and
include:
• Using the TR-55 method for calculating the time of concentrations instead of
the CNLM method used.
• Discussion and inclusion of a long term maintenance plan for drywell
structures included in the plan.
'
• Design based upon 100 year storm events.
1 5 3-295
• In the discussion of treatment of storm water runoff nutrients, the DGEIS
provides a comparison between predevelopment conditions and post -
development conditions. Additional discussion should be provided to
discuss whether current levels of nutrient loading are acceptable.
• Effect of thermal discharge of water heated by paved parking areas should be
included
• Detailed discussion of the temporary control of sediment runoff during
'
construction should be included.
6. The DGEIS repeatedly emphasizes the positive economic impact of the project
'
while completely ignoring any possible negative impacts.
The assessed value of the Park in 1999 was $17,185,500. The assessed value of
waterfront homes on Glen Lake was $45 million in 1997.
Twicwood properties have already declined in value due to noise from the Park.
'
Due to good recreational water quality Glen Lake homes have appreciated and are
considered desirable. If, due to environmental degradation caused by Great -
Escape expansion (visual ... water pollution... noise) properties on Glen Lake
decline in value the impact may be considerable. If homes decline in value by
50%, then the property tax revenue decline to the Town will exceed the total
property tax paid by the Six Flags Corporation.
If all infrastructure improvements such as extension of sewer lines, widening of
'
Route Nine and Gurney Lane, etc. are not paid for by Six Flags, then an economic
burden will be borne by the taxpayers.
'
Welfare and unemployment benefits paid to temporary workers will create an
economic impact on our residents.
The Warren County Sheriff, Lawrence Cleveland, was never consulted when the
authors of the DGEIS claimed that no additional police service would be required
due to the expansion plans. He has stated that additional services will be required.
7. The design parameters for the sewage treatment plan should be recalculated.
There are errors in section 2.1.10 which bring into question all the data and
conclusions in this section. First, they indicate the volume of sewage from the
current theme park as 45, 636 GPD. They then estimate that the Park with
expansion will produce only 60,000 GPD. Based upon an increase in visitors
from approximately 900,000 to 1.5 million (a factor of 1.5), the volume with
expansion of the theme park should be 68,454 GPD. Therefore, their total volume
should be 103,454 GPD, not 95,000 GPD.
L
The DGEIS purports to show that the system proposed will produce effluent
'
quality which is significantly better that DEC standards. However, the proposed
1 6 3-296
level for phosphorus discharge (0.5mg/1) only just meets DEC potential effluent
' standards. Glen Lake cannot biologically afford any additional phosphorous
loading.
Will measures of current phosphorous be taken and analysis of future
phosphorous in Glen Lake and the watershed be determined based upon this
additional loading?
Sources at DEC claim that phosphorous discharged to a river does not accumulate
in the river as it does in a lake. This accumulation will result in a considerable
degradation of the lake over time. They strongly suggest that the sewage from an
expanded park be handled via a sewer line connecting it to the treatment plant at
Glens Falls which is now operating at 50% of capacity.
A comparison study of the effects of ammonia, phosphorous, and Biological
Oxygen Demand on the watershed and waters of Glen Lake should be done which
compares the alternative of local sewage treatment versus transfer of the sewage
to the Glens Falls treatment plant via a sewer line.
' The following additions and analyses should be added to this DGEIS.
1. The suitability of this site for the level of expansion anticipated.
Due to the location of this property in a NYSDEC designated Critical
Environmental Area and its close proximity to residential neighborhoods, its
development must be limited. We cannot expect it to expand as other parks such
as Six Flags Park in Darien, which is surrounded by acres of farmland. They
must recognize that they purchased a piece of property which not suitable for the
purposes they had in mind.
Consideration should be given to alternatives which project a more modest
expansion which can limit the impacts on the area.
2. Analysis of the effects of phosphorus loading due to both the storm water
run-off from the extensive development of lots,
parking attractions within the
amusement area and the planned sewage treatment effluent on waters entering
'
Glen Lake.
3. A comparison and compatibility study of this document with the Glen Lake
Watershed Management Plan adopted by the Town of Queensbury in 1999.
'
Page 20 of the Management Plan includes a toxic substance Study. Sediment
samples taken in 1997 from the Glen Lake Fen at a site adjacent to the Great
Escape showed significant levels of toxic substances. The sources of this
'
pollution should be studied, identified and included in this DGEIS.
4. An alternative plan which does not include the removal of all trees from the
Northern portions of area C.
5. The adoption of a sewage line extension from WalMart as the primary
wastewater disposal method should be included. In addition, a comparison study
of the effects of ammonia, phosphorous, and Biological Oxygen Demand on the
watershed and waters of Glen Lake should be done which compares the
1
7 3-297
C�
11
n
G
0
H
1
alternative of local sewage treatment versus transfer of the sewage to the Glens
Falls treatment plant via a sewer line.
6. A complete analysis (currently missing from the DGEIS) of traffic effects on
local collector roads.
7. Additional noise studies, including documentation of complaints registered in
the past by neighboring residents of the Park. The scoping document called for
modeling of noise travel over water to determine its effects on all riparian owners
at Glen Lake. Many sites on Glen Lake where resident complaints had been
registered were not included in the study and should be added to the DGEIS.
8. The inclusion of appropriate governmental agencies in the analysis of
additional services* which may be required of them as a result of this proposed
expansion. Those agencies should include the local school districts, law
enforcement agencies, highway departments and fire departments.
9. Analysis of storm water run-off from additional traffic on Route 9, Glen Lake
Rd. and Round Pond Rd. on the Glen Lake and round Pond watershed should be
done. If additional traffic from a 70% increase in attendance is expected, then
there should be more automotive pollutants dripping from the additional cars
using those roads. Those pollutants end up in the watershed. There effects should
be included in the study.
10. The impact of special events and night operations should be analyzed. Currently,
special events are held which utilize rock bands and fireworks into the late
evening. Hours of operation should be limited to those in the past year and limits
should be placed upon the noise from special events. Traffic analysis should
include the traffic generated when special events end causing a mass exodus of
patrons.
11. Negative economic impacts were completely overlooked and should be analyzed.
8 3-298
11
I
H
H
In summation, we respectfully ask the Planning Board to include these concerns and
studies in the Final Impact Statement. We also request that alternatives to the removal of
trees in area C be strongly considered. Limits on ride heights are crucial to protect Glen
Lake from noise and visual pollution. Sewage plans must be adopted which completely
protect the DEC Critical Environmental Area. Pervious materials should be specified for
the parking lot paving and vegetative buffers must be included to prevent pollution of the
Glen Lake Brook and the fen from chemicals carried in storm water. Alternative plans
for parking should be included which either limit the number of cars or provide double
decking of an area so that these vegetative barriers be included and trees be allowed to
remain. The hill on the North part of area C should be retained to provide a noise barrier
to I87.
We, the Glen Lake Protective Association, thank the Board for the careful consideration
of this issue.
Sincerel ,-
Dona d A. Milne, II
Pres.
Scott Cartier
Vice Pres.
Linda Clark Whitty
Sec. f%
�L71 ek-
Anna Fowler
Sec.
Lorraine Stein
Treas.
f and ol-1 iectors
_P ul Derby
Vir * is Etu
Diane Hayes �J
J
illiam Miller
1 3-299
8
ENGINEER'S NARRATIVE
REVIEW OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DOCUMENTS
THE GREAT ESCAPE/SPLASHWATER KINGDOM
Town of Queensbury
Warren County, New York
October 2000
Prepared for:
Glen Lake Protective Association
P.O. Box 4135
Queensbury, NY 12804-4135
Prepared by:
The Environmental Design Partnership
900 Route 146
Clifton Park, New York 12065
518/371-7621
FAX 518/371-9540
3-300
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ENGINEER'S NARRATIVE
REVIEW OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DOCUMENTS
THE GREAT ESCAPE/SPLASHWATER KINGDOM
SECTION PAGE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 & 2
2.0 STORMWATER METHODOLOGIES 2.5
3.0 REGULATORY COMPLIANCE 5
4.0 ISSUES REQUIRING ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION 6 & 7
5.0 SUMMARIZATION 7
3-301
I
I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Great Escape/Splashwater Kingdom is currently requesting approvals from the Town of
Queensbury. New York. to allow improvements/expansion to occur on portions of property
currently owned by the park. In conjunction with the improvements/expansion plans a "Draft
Generic Environmental Impact Statement" (DGEIS) was prepared.
To address the issue of stormwater runoff the DGEIS includes information specifically related to
the stormwater management issue. The documents indicate that a stormwater management plan
will be included as part of the proposed site improvements. The proposed plan includes three
primary methods to control the runoff from the proposed development area. The three methods
include infiltration, detention and sheet flow.
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation recognizes all three stormwater
methodologies. as altematives for stormwater control. Infiltration is recognized as the preferred
method of stormwater control. Detention systems are widely used for flood control and
managing large volumes of runoff. Sheet flow management, is generally used when there are
large portions of the watershed that are paved.
There are two issues related to the proposed management system that require additional
supporting information. The first issue is verification of the soils and seasonal water table depth
within the proposed development area. The information contained in the DGEIS document is
based on information obtained form the Soil Conservation Service and site specific testing was
not included. Since a significant percentage of the proposed management system is based on
infiltration site specific testing should be completed to justify the design.
The second issue requiring additional clarification would be the treatment of the stormwater
runoff prior to discharging from the site. The report does contain substantial discussion related
t to this issue however, additional discussion related to the "first flush" and thermal impacts
should be included. Additionally. further explanation of the detention systems and sheet runoff
systems ability to provide treatment to the runoff should be provided. Typically these type
management systems are good for flood control but not necessarily for treaunent of the runoff.
Since this watershed has a direct effect on the quality of runoff contributing to the Glen Lake Fen
' and Glen Lake, it would appear management techniques designed to protect and improve the
water quality of these critical environmental areas, should be used.
I
I
900 Route 146, Clifton Park, New York 12065
phone (518) 371-7621 - fax (518) 371-9540
e-mail: endesign@woridnet.att.net
1
3-302
T.�� IiIINI�cIVi�l��
' ENGINEER'S NARRATIVE
REVIEW OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DOCUMENTS
' THE GREAT ESCAPE/SPLASHWATER KINGDOM
' 1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Environmental Design Partnership was retained by the Glen Lake Protective Association to
' review the stormwater management plan outlined in the "Draft Generic Environmental Impact
Statement (DGEIS) for the Great Escape Theme Park, L.L.C., The Great Escape Splashwater
Kingdom-',. (Volumes 1 of 3 and 3 of 3), dated July 2000 and prepared by the L.A. Group,
' Saratoga Springs, New York. The purpose of this Engineer's Narrative is to provide comments
related to the information contained in the DGEIS and identify areas that may require additional
consideration.
The Great Escape is in the process of applying for the necessary approvals to complete
improvements/expansion to the park. The DGEIS documents provide detailed information
' related to the environmental and zoning issues associated with the proposed expansion.
t The park owners have acquired additional property on which they would like to complete
improvements/expansion. The DGEIS describes the additional property as Park Area C. Park
Area C contains approximately 62.8 +/- acres of land located between New York State Route 9
(NYS9) and the Adirondack Northway (I-87). A portion of Park Area C is presently used for the
main parking lot and overflow parking. Other uses presently located within the Park Area C
boundaries include; an existing ice cream stand with associated motel and cabins. a restaurant. a
' real estate office, one single family residence and the Samoset Motel, with cabins. The DGEIS
documents focus on the proposed development to occur within Park Area C.
' In addition to the Park Area C holdings, the park owners have a substantial parcel of property
(77+/- acres) located on the west side of I-87. The property located on the west side of I-87
(referred to as Park Area B) is mostly wetlands and there are no plans at the present time for
activity on this parcel.
' The third -parcel of land under park control is the existing park area (approximately 237.6 +/-
acres) located on the east side of NYS9 (referred to as Park Area A). The DGEIS does not
include any descriptions of specific improvements/expansion to be competed within Park Area
A. The documents do discuss general expansion plans for this area, however, there were no
specific discussions related to improvements within this parcel.
n
900 Route 146, Clifton Park, New York 12065
phone (518) 371-7621 - fax (518) 371-9540
e-mail: endesign@worldnet.att.net
3-303
u
The bulk of the information included in the DGEIS documents is related to Park Area C.
Proposed improvements to this area include paving and enlarging existing parking lots (increase
from 2.600 spaces to 4.000+/- spaces), constructing a 200 +/- room hotel and possibly a
' conference center and the construction of a ring road around the new parking lots. The ring road
is intended to efficiently move traffic through the parking lots and avoid the current traffic issues
related to NYS9. y
2.0 STORMWATER METHODOLOGIES
Based on information presented in the DGEIS documents, there is no formal stormwater
management system currently in use within the park. The site presently consists of the
t amusement park complex located on the east side of New York State Route 9 (NYS9) and the
main parking areas located on the west side of NYS9. Stormwater runoff presently discharges
from the gravel -surfaced lots by sheet flow. The majority of the runoff discharges to a drainage
channel (wetland corridor) located in the center of the existing main parking area. The drainage
corridor continues under NYS9 to the east side (amusement park) where it traverses through the
park as a combination of ponds and drainage channels before ultimately discharging to the Glen
' Lake Fen. Runoff from walkways and paved surfaces within the park complex contributes to the
drainage corridor by sheet flow.
The documents indicate the developed area of the existing amusement park and associated
parking lots to be approximately 68.9 +/- acres. Of the 68.9 +/- acre developed area,
approximately 8.8 +/- acres consist of impervious type land cover, approximately 11 +/- acres of
gravel parking and the remaining 49.1 +/- acres consist of lawn. or landscaped ground covers.
The predevelopment runoff calculations for the developed portion of the park indicate a peak
runoff rate from the site of 23 +/- cfs. based on a fifty-year storm event. This existing runoff
presently discharges to the drainage network that traverses through the park and discharges to the
Glen Lake Fen.
The stormwater management plan presented for Park Area C improvements/enlargement will
consist of a combination of three management techniques. The majority of the. site. (43°l%) will be
managed by a series of subsurface drywells designed to infiltrate runoff directly into the ground.
In addition to the individual drywell structures, the plans include a number of open detention
basins (41%) designed to provide a sufficient storage volume to detain storm events, while
releasing flow at a rate equal to the existing parking lot runoff rate. Finally, the plans include
portions of the site (16%) that will sheet flow directly into the existing drainage corridors located
on the property.
2
900 Route 146, Clifton Park, New York 12065
phone (518) 371-7621 - fax (518) 371-9540
e-mail: endesign@woddnet.att.net
' 3-304
1
' The largest percentage of stormwater runoff (43%) within Park Area C will be managed by
infiltration. Infiltration is recognized as a preferred method of stormwater management when
site conditions are warranted. Infiltration systems typically require soils that consist of well -
drained sand. In addition. the seasonal water table must be sufficiently deep to provide an
unsaturated zone between the bottom of the proposed system and the seasonal water table.
The DGEIS documents include information related to type of soils that exist within the proposed
development area. The soils information provided was obtained from the Soil Conservation
' Service. Soils Mapping Prepared for the Warren County Soil and Water Conservation District.
The information provided suggests that the majority of the soils contained within the
development area consist of well -drained sands. The DGEIS does not include any site -specific
information such as test pits, completed to verify the presence of these sandy soils.
The use of Soil Conservation Service information is common for many general planning and
' engineering purposes. The information provides a general description of soils within mapping
units that are coordinated with the United States Geological Survey (USGS) maps. Generally,
the information is fairly accurate and provides a good starting point for preliminary design
' purposes. The problem with the information is that often times there may be variability of the
soils within a mapping unit that may not identified unless site verification is completed.
tSince the largest percentage of the management system will rely on the soils ability to recharge
runoff directly into the ground. it would appear that site -specific test borings should be
' performed to verify the design.
Based on review of the infiltration rates used to design the drywell system, it appears that a high
' infiltration rate was used for the drywell design. The computer output indicates that an
infiltration rate of .2 cfs was used. Assuming that the typical drywell structure may consist of an
eight foot diameter precast concrete structure, surrounded with a two foot ring of stone and an
' average depth of nine feet (appeared typical throughout the system), the effective infiltration area
per dry well, would be approximately 339 CF. Based on this information, the design infiltration
rate computes to approximately 25 inches/hour. The maximum suggested design infiltration rate
' recommended by NYSDEC is 7.5 inches/hour. This would suggest that the infiltration system
described in the DGEIS documents might be significantly undersized.
I
h
In order for an infiltration system to function properly a minimum separation between the bottom
of the proposed drywells and the existing seasonal high groundwater level is required. The
NYSDEC suggest that a minimum of four feet of separation be maintained. The soils
information contained in the DGEIS indicates that the seasonal water table is in excess of six
feet. This information is based on the Soil Conservation Service information and no on -site
testing was completed to confirm this.
3
900 Route 146, Clifton Park, New York 12065
phone (518) 371-7621 - fax (518) 371-9540
e-mail: endesign@worldnet.att.net
1 3-305
11
The average depth of the proposed drywells is nine feet. In addition to the nine -foot structure
depth. a four -foot separation distance is suggested between the bottom of the proposed structure
and the seasonal high water table. The typical drywell configuration includes a catch basin
discharging to the drywell. To provide cover over the catch basin pipes. the pipes are typically
installed an average of three to four feet in the ground. The effective drywell depth is generally
calculated below the invert of the incoming pipes. Thus the total required depth of the drywell
structures would be in the 15 — 18 foot range.
The proposed grading plan for the development within Park Area C indicates significant cuts and
' fills required. Due to the estimated depth of the drywell structures it would appear that test
borings should be completed to not only verify the soil type, but also to confirm the existing
' seasonal water table depth. Based on the elevational relationship between the site, Rush Pond,
Round Pond, the Glen Lake Fen and Glen Lake, it would appear that the water table might be an
influencing factor on the proposed drywell design.
tThe second largest percentage (41 %) of the stormwater runoff is to be managed by detention.
Detention is a widely used management technique. The benefit of detention systems is to"
' provide a storage volume, which is sufficient to hold large runoff volumes of water for short
periods, while allowing a release that is generally set to match the predeyelopment condition.
Detention is a widely used method primarily for flood control.
Since the primary purpose of detention basins is for flood control, the basins typically do little to
P PAP tYP Y
provide treatment of the stormwater runoff. There will be some settling of silts and sediments
contained in the runoff. but for the most part, the runoff passes through the system untreated.
When runoff water quality is a concern (as it is in this case), extended detention is typically
' preferred over detention. Extended detention will accomplish the same purpose as a detention
basin, with the added effect of providing additional treatment to the flows. Typically, extended
detention basins are designed to increase the amount of time that the runoff is in the basin. The
' extended time provides opportunity for suspended particles to settle, prior to being discharged
from the basin. Extended detention basins can be equipped with water quality outlets that further
enhance the ability of the system to provide treatment of the runoff. Extended detention basins
can also be designed to provide management for the "first flush" storm event.
4
900 Route 146, Clifton Park, New York 12065
phone (518) 371-7621 - fax (518) 371-9540
e-mail: endesign@worldnet.att.net
1 3-306
1
ri
H
H
H
The final management practice mentioned in the DGEIS documents was sheet flow (16%).
Based on review it appears that runoff in these areas will be allowed to discharge directly to
existing drainage structures without any type of treatment provided. This situation would be
similar to the wav the existing gravel parking lots are set up. The difference is that even though
the existing lots are relatively impervious gravel. there is still the opportunity for some minor
treatment (infiltration) to occur. Once the parking lots are paved. there will be no treatment of
the runoff. Water will flow across the pavement carrying any surface pollutants along with it.
In conjunction with the sheet flow method. it would be beneficial to provide vegetated buffers. or
grassed strips, prior to discharging the runoff. Since the proposed method of the "festival' style
parking is to move all the proposed landscaping to the perimeters of the site, there is not much
opportunity to provide such buffer areas for the interior portions of the paved lots.
3.0 REGULATORY COMPLIANCE
Most municipalities within New York State. including the Town of Queensbury. have adopted
the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Division of Water Technical
and Operations Guidance Series (5.1.8) Guidelines for ;Veiv
Developments ". The guidance series was intended to provide municipalities a model ordinance
to use for the design and review of construction projects requiring .stormwater control. The
guidance series provides detail related to the various methods of stormwater management and it
lists the order of preference. as well as the strengths and weaknesses of each management
approach. The common methods for stormwater management, in order of preference include;
infiltration, retention, extended detention and supplemental stormwater management practices.
The proposed stormwater management plan incorporates infiltration, detention and sheet flow.
The infiltration method complies with both state and local requirements for stormwater
management. The detention and sheet flow portions of the design would not appear to comply
fully with the state and local requirements. Typically, NYSDEC requires stormwater
management plans to treat runoff from the "first flush", or the two-year design storm. The theory
behind this requirement is that the smaller storm events are the more typical storm and therefore,
provisions should be made to accommodate them in the design. Since detention basins typically
do not include sumps (storage volume below outlet pipe invert) there is no provision to treat the
"first flush" event by infiltration.
The sheet flow portion of the management system would also appear to be lacking treatment of
the `first flush". Typically with sheet flow type drainage systems, surface water is directed
toward catch basins, wetlands, ponds or other drainage systems with no primary treatment. Thus,
the sheet flow runoff caries surface pollutants directly to the point of discharge.
5
900 Route 146, Clifton Park, New York 12065
phone (518) 371-7621 - fax (518) 371-9540
e-mail: endesign@woddnet.att.net
1
3-307
Ll
1
4.0 ISSUES REQUIRING ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION
The followinp- items were noted during the review of the documents. Further clarification of
these issues is suggested:
The time of concentrations for the individual sub -watersheds were calculated using the
Curve Number Lag Method (CNLM). Typically. the CNLM averages the runoff
coefficient based on the percentage of impervious area versus open space. The CNLM
typically provides slightly longer time of concentrations. The "festival" style parking
design creates large areas of impervious ground surface with the open space located
around the parking lot perimeters. Based on the proposed design the TR-55 sheet flow
method would be a more appropriate choice for determining the time of concentrations.
The TR-55 method is typically suggested for parking areas. The TR-55 method would
most likely result in shorter time of concentrations and possibly an increase in runoff
volumes.
Experience has shown that drywell structures are both expensive to install and maintain.
The DGEIS does not include any discussion on the long-term maintenance plan for the
proposed structures (over 100 drywells). The cleaning of these structures once they have
silted -in requires sophisticated equipment that is generally expensive to operate. In order
for the stormwater system to perform as designed, the structures will require periodic
removal of the sediments. If sediments are not removed from the system, the infiltration
rate will be compromised and more frequent surface flooding will occur.
• The stormwater discussions do not provide any information related to storm events in
'
excess of 50 years. Typically. systems are designed to provide a safe overland
conveyance of the 100-year event. Assuming that the drywells are sufficient to manage
storm events up to fifty years, it is likely that storms in excess of fifty years will cause
temporary flooding within the parking lots. Additional information should be provided
regarding the flooding depth and the length of time these conditions may occur.
0 The DGEIS provides discussion related to the treatment of stormwater runoff nutrients.
The discussion provides a comparison between predeveloped conditions and post -
development conditions. Based on the information provided, it appears that the proposed
system will not increase the present pollutant runoff concentrations. Additional
discussion should be provided to discuss whether the current levels are acceptable.
N.
900 Route 146, Clifton Park, New York 12065
phone (518) 371-7621 - fax (518) 371-9540
e-mail: endesign@worldnet.att.net
1 3-308
I
I
' • The documents lack reference to the control of thermal discharges from the site. Since
the area of the proposed parking lots is significant. thermal discharge would appear to be
a significant concern. Since asphalt will generally store heat longer than unpaved
surfaces, it is possible that the temperature of the runoff will increase significantly over
the temperature of the runoff from the unpaved lots.
• The documents lack detailed discussion related to the temporary control of sediment
runoff during construction. Since the proposed grading of the site requires significant
' cuts and fills, control of sediments during construction should be of utmost concern.
5.0 SUMMARIZATION
Based on review of the stormwater management details provided in the DGEIS documents, it is
our position that additional clarification and documentation is warranted.
Due to the nature of the proposed development there is the potential to have large quantities of
automobiles parked for significant periods of time. Anytime such an accumulation of vehicles
occurs. there is the possibility for contamination of surface runoff due to the presence of
pollution sources associated with the vehicles. If the runoff from such areas is not properly
controlled, there is potential to have negative effects on critical environmental areas within the
watershed.
There is also the potential for the project to protect and perhaps improve existing critical
environmental areas. Utilization of recognized stormwater management techniques and
incorporation of water quality treatment methods has historically helped to prevent degradation
' of water quality in receiving water bodies.
Since the existing park doesn't have a formal stormwater management plan in effect. the
proposed improvements/enlargement could have positive impacts on critical environmental areas
if the proper means of stormwater management are used.
Completed by,
w OL G4�
Charles D. Baker P.E.
Associate
The Environmental Design Partnership
CDB/cb/gtescape
900 Route 146, Clifton Park, New York 12065
V/
phone (518) 371-7621 - fax (518) 371-9540
e-mail: endesign@worldnet.att.net
3-309
1
Mr. Craig MacEwan
Chairperson, Town Planning Board
Queensbury Town Hall
742 Bay Rd.
Queensbury, NY 12804
Dear Mr. MacEwan
The following comments are made in response to the DGEIS submitted by the Great
Escape for their proposed five-year expansion
• I hate the idea of having massive parking lots bordering the Lake George road, or any
road, for that matter. In this case, the risk of pollution to the input stream into Glen
Lake seems absolutely counter to the efforts everyone has made to keep the lake
clean. Why are we doing this?
I also remember using the lake as a child, in a fairly clean and quiet manner, not
having to listen and see an amusement park above the trees, and runoff coming into.
the lake. My Mother has now lived close to the inlet year around, for close to 40
years, starting when there wasn't a "Great Escape", rather a small park called
"Storytown", which didn't seem to try to force residents to live with this kind of
encroachment. The claim of "we were there first" by the Great Escape seems
ludicrous.
• As far as the impact being "minimal compared to the economic benefits of the
expansion", it seems to me that the "economic benefits" are mostly slated for the
Great Escape, or else they wouldn't be doing this in the first place.
• I can't believe that movement of the quantity of soil needed in this plan would be
allowed in an environmentally sound environment. Folks in California, whose
property slides away on them are testament to the result of this kind of thing.
It's clear to me that the Great Escape means to build, pollute and further destroy the
P P Y
beauty that is Glen Lake, by systematically making the place worthless, except to the
Great Escape. In the next 5-year plan, will we also have Great Escape paddleboat rides
on Glen Lake, with built-in restaurants? That would gain "economic benefits" as well.
Problem is, they would probably want to raise the lake level to float the boats,
' eliminating all residences. It would be easy, because no one would want to live there.
Enough!
Sincerely,
Richard Nicholson
1 3-310
HELLO
' LOOK I AM S YEAKS OLD AND LIKE HAVI"G MORE PEOPLE 6UT I DO
WANT A NICE HOME AND I AM TIKED OF t�JOKKI NCB ON THIS STUFF
AND 13U5T HOPE IT WILL wOKK OUT.
GOHAT wiLL6ETHE DIFFEKENCES WITH THENEw EXPANSION?
"HAT "ILL OUR wATEK IN THE wET LAND LOOK LIKE?
3U5T "HY DOES C BEAT ESCAPE NEED TO EXPAND ANY MOKE?
T ESCAPE DO THE LLOONS ON wIND D S?
wHY DOES CKER R 6R v Rv
FKOM 6EN FOwLEK
9(o ASH DK. LAKE C?EOKGE NY I•RByS
3-311
�•r.��:►t!► -fir./F7-*4
"�r!11•1/•//!/1!► �*0 !11!►�/f!► �404404*/1�►
illtllisl_16� ��Ilill�ll�\illii\ l�li�11�11a�
► '•. ► • :mac+ ► R. • 44
4 ►. • 4 ►'% . g . - ► • 4 1-. 4 •
¢ 4�l 1di1 41 Iil imi4twes�lai lal lid
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
eV,Ial�Co�s
Division of Environmental Permits, Region 5
232 Hudson Street - P. O. Box 220, Warrensburg, New York 12885-0220
Phone: (518) 623-3671 • FAX: (518) 623-3603
YEgRs
Website: www.dec.state.ny.us
John P. Cahill
Commissioner
October 27, 2000--
�..: Hess w
t L .
Craig MacEwan, Chairman
:Jid�vc �
Town of Queensbury Planning Board = �,'; ::`; , _
'— �
- U.
Town Center, 742 Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
Re: Great Escape Theme Park - Comments on the Draft Generic
Environmental Impact Statement (DGEIS) for
Expansion of Visitor Support Facilities
Queensbury (T), Warren (Co.)
' Dear Mr. MacEwan:
On July, 28, 2000, the Town of Queensbury Planning Board, in its capacity as Lead Agency, accepted a
'Draft Generic EIS for a proposal by The Great Escape Theme Park. LLC to expand Visitor Support Facilities.
The following comments prepared by NYS DEC staff pertain to the Draft Generic EIS for the Great Escape
project. As a preface to our comments, I will take this opportunity to note that staff generally found the DGEIS
to be adequate in terms of its scope and content.
COMMENTS
At page 2-15 under Project Description, the DGEIS provides a summary
p g � p p of existing conditions (Table 2-
3). To enable a comparative assessment, DEC recommends Table 2-3 be revised to include a summary of post -
expansion conditions.
tAt page 2-16, the DGEIS indicates the stormwater management system will be "designed to control and
treat the first flush of runoff'. Please explain how stormwater will be treated.
Compared to the existing (pre -expansion) condition, ho* many acres of parking area will be paved
following completion of the expansion?
The DGEIS indicates the Great Escape is planning to replace existing subsurface wastewater disposal
systems consisting of 27 separate outfalls with a single, tertiary -grade treatment system that would discharge to
a small on site lagoon. Generally, NYS DEC prefers centralized wastewater collection and treatment systems
tover a multitude of individual systems and outfalls. In this case, a centralized system appears to have
advantages over the existing arrangement of individual systems. However, the DGEIS does not discuss
'construction -related impacts associated with this option. Presumably, sewer pipe will have to be installed
across streams and, perhaps, through wetlands. The EIS should make it clear that an effort will be made to
minimize the number of crossings and that existing bridges will be used as much as possible.
' 3-313
1
Craig MacEwan
Re: Great Escape Theme Park - Comments on DGEIS
October 27. 2000
is
Regarding Section 3.7 (Cultural Environmental Resources), has the Office of Parks, Recreation and
Historic Preservation (Parks) been consulted? If so, has Parks provided any findings or conclusions relative to
cultural resource impacts?
Regarding "Park Area B" (Rush Pond and portions of its associated wetlands), staff understands the
current expansion project includes no plans to develop this area. However, given that Area B is delineated in
the DGEIS and given the fact the DGEIS is intended to be a comprehensive planning tool, the EIS should at
least discuss how this area will be conserved during construction and subsequent operation of the new facilities.
At page 3-5, rare bryophytes are discussed. Are these actually on lands owned by Great Escape? Please
reconcile with related statements on page 4-13.
DEC appreciates efforts to minimize/mitigate loss of shrubs and trees (Fig 4-1) particularly.around
streams. In addition. DEC appreciates the effort that will be taken to replant in certain areas where vegetation
twill be removed. Staff notes that shrubs would be particularly effective in screening the visibility of the site
and providing wildlife habitat.
' Section 4, page 4-1 is entitled "Potentially Significant Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures".
In fact, this section is a discussion of economic impacts. This requires correction.
Staff notes that bulk storage provisions for pesticides appear reasonable. In particular, staff notes
quantities of stored chemical are modest and the types of chemicals stored pose no particular concern.
At subsection 4.4 on page 4-8, DEC recommends that The Great Escape consider a habitat improvement
project to mitigate loss of habitat due to installation of culverts.
At page 4-9, the DGEIS states that groundwater will not be impacted "because no excavation will occur
at or below water table". If infiltration galleys will be used to manage stormwater flows, groundwater could be
impacted. Also, in Park Area C, the groundwater table must be very near the surface, i.e. significantly closer
than the 6' that is referenced in the EIS as typical. This requires correction.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. If you have'any questions or clarification is required, please
contact me.
Sincerely,
4
Thomas W. Hall
Environmental Analyst 2
cc: J. Lebowitz
The LA Group
3-314
1
J
Town of Queensbury Planning Board
Chairman Mac Ewan
Queensbury Town Hall
Bay Road
Queensbury, NY 12804
October 27, 2000
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I would like to thank the Board for extending the comment period for the Great Escapes's
DGEIS.
As have many Queensbury residents, I have previously provided detailed information
outlining my some of concerns regarding the DGEIS submitted by the Great Escape to
the Planning Board.
Repeated analysis of the document shows numerous instances of contradictory opinion
and ambiguous timetables and statements for expansion. It is important that the board
examine these aspects of the study as to thoroughly evaluate the project.
Unsupported opinion occurs in too many places to be included in this letter. I have
chosen the following examples to illustrate what I believe to be intentional
misrepresentation by the applicants of their planned development, as well as the data
supporting those intended actions. This carries serious consequences for the community
at large.
• Festival Parking: Section 1-9, 1.4.1 states " need variance or creation of new
category of parking applicable to this facility and similar amusement or recreational
areas. Creation of a new category of parking will require Town Board action." The
contradiction occurs on page 1-2, 1.3.1 of Project and Need: " all existing or
proposed uses, which are the subject of this document, are permitted used in
conformance with existing zoning and consistent with the Town of Queensbury
Comprehensive Land Use Plan."
• Section 2-2 states, " Additional parking lots may be modified to accommodate
shuttle stops or other pedestrian facilities that may be desired." Who determines the
modification and when and what specifically are these other facilities?'
• Section 2-7 states, " As a result of the pedestrian bridge and fencing, the flow of cars
along US Rte. 9 will not slow or. stop for large numbers of pedestrian crossing the
Park. This will lead to fewer.. interruptions of movement along the entire US Rte. 9
corridor." The back up will now occur not in front of Great Escape as it currently
does, but closer to the round Pond and Glen Lake Road intersections.
• Section 2-18 states, " The possible sequence of construction is a follows." I will not
list the specific sequence, however my concern is the ramification on the community
if the timetable changes for these specific developments. There needs to be a more
detailed, structured plan of development than what is proposed.
• Section 3-21 states, " All existing or proposed uses ... conform to existing zoning and
are consistent with the Queensbury CLUP." This is an additional contradiction to the
"festival parking" request which requires zoning approval or Town Board approval.
1
3-315
1
I
J
I
r�
1
• Section 3-34 states, " existing intervening topography such as a hill is very effective
in limiting noise propagation. Vegetative screening alone. while it will soften or
block visual impacts is a much less effective noise barrier than intervening land
forms. The study continues by stating in section 2-1 that perimeter planting proposed
in parking lots will not " mitigate noise when hills are removed." The residents of the
bordering neighborhoods certainly agree with this statement. Parking garage
alternatives were not considered thoroughly in this document, other than to state they
were too expensive. I request serious consideration be given to requiring a garage at
the former Animal Land site to prevent the loss of vegetation which serves as a
visual screen and a noise deterrent for the surrounding area.
• Section 2-18 states, " As part of past special events, musical entertainment has been
provided. This has occurred on numerous occasions annually since 1995 with
virtually no noise complaints." As a resident who has complained to the Park and the
Warren County Sheriff Department in the past, I am outraged by this blatant
misrepresentation of the public's response to these events. These events are not
acceptable just because notice is given that they will occur.
• Section 3-24: " 80 % of the traffic approaches from the north." That is because they
have exited the I-87 at exit 20 and have to travel south to arrive at the Park.
• Section 3-40 states, " acoustical environment or residential neighborhoods studied
have not significantly changed even though Park activities have increased over the
decade that noise levels have been monitored." If you refer to chart 3-9, it indicates
that in 1990 the Leq was 48.1 and in 1999 it was 53.8. You do the math!
• Section 3-39 states, " During the PMK sampling, noise identified as the Alpine
Bobsled was heard at about 9 dBA above background noise of 41 dBA at Courthouse
Estates, and at about 12 dBA above background at Twicwood Estates." The human
ear perceives these increases as double.
This is just a sampling of the contradictory statements that appear in the DGEIS. I believe
the spirit of this document to be deceptive and question the motives of a major
corporation in doing so. This is not only an issue of undocumented assumption but of
misinterpretation of data included in the study. Would the Great Escape really have the
Board believe that this is a "working document" as they claimed and therefore serve as its
explanation for these shortcomings?
Further, I would like to draw the Board's attention to the following issues:
• New Rides: Section 2-18: " The size, shape, configuration, attendee queue areas and
overall park circulation have to be considered for each new attraction and are the
primary consideration for selecting an attraction to be added." Considering the
public outcry over the noise level of the Alpine Bobsled, it is beyond my
comprehension that nothing would be include in this section regarding decibel levels
of rides to be installed. It certainly does not lend credibility to their claim that they
will and are attempting to mitigate the current problem with that ride. All that
considered, I would have considerable skepticism regarding the Great Escape's claim
to still be attempting to solve the problem with the Bobsled. It is imperative that they
be required to address the current problems before any addition expansion is
approved.
I
3-316
11
-2 • " 4. r • Co-exiisting• Section 3 2. Story town was established in 195 Great Escape pre-
dated most residential development and has coexisted with these neighborhoods since
their construction." The neighborhoods co -existed with Storytown, a children' s
theme park, not Great Escape.
• Hours of operation: All other existing Six Flags properties remain open beyond the
current closing times of Great Escape. It is requested that the Planning Board not
approve extended hours for this location given its current problems with noise,
proximity to residential areas, and its inability to mitigate to date.
• Decibel levels: It would be impossible to control noise using only hours of operation
restrictions. Noise levels could conceivably exceed current readings, which are now
' disruptive.
• Ride Height: The determined maximum allowable height for additional rides should
follow the guidelines established in the new zoning ordinance. This would require
zoning approval for additional rides and allow evaluation to be made as to visual
pollution on a ride -by -ride basis. Perhaps a requirement that the ride not exceed the
tree line would be and alternative. Then when we welcomed tourists to the
adirondacks they would actually see trees.
I would hope that this gives the Planning Board an indication of not just the specific
shortcomings of this document but an inclination of the misleading intent of presenting
this to the Board and the community, and the ramifications of such actions for the town
of Queensbury.
I request the board establish an alternative timetable for each stage of development when
evaluating the DGEIS which will allow time for each stage to be evaluated before
proceeding to the next stage.
I respectfully urge this Board to deny this application as is written. There are too many
areas of concern that have not been adequately addressed for this expansion to occur as
outlined in this DGEIS.
Thank you for this opportunity to address the Board.
Sincerely,
Joanne Bramley
cc: Mrs. LaBombard
Mr. Vollaro
Mr. Ringer
Mr. Strough
Mr. Metivier
Mr. Hunsinger
1
1 3-317
i
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
742 Bay Road, Queensbury, NY. 12804-5902
Mr. Jack R. Lebowitz
Lemery MacKrell Greisler LLC
10 Railroad Place
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
RE: Great Escape DGEIS
Dear Mr. Lebowitz:
October 27, 2000
Please find attached Planning Department staff comments concerning the
Great Escape DGEIS. These comments are in addition to those forwarded to
you by Chazen Engineering and Land Surveying, Inc..
We would like to note that these comments are submitted after careful
consideration and review. Planning staff has participated in every step of the
DGEIS process, and we believe that we have made every effort to be as
comprehensive as possible without being duplicative.
Thank you for your attention and we look forward to bringing a Final GEIS for the
Great Escape Theme Park LLC to conclusion as expeditiously and fairly as
possible.
Sincerely,
e_
Marilyn J. Ryba, AICP
Senior Planner
cc. Craig MacEwan, Chairman
Town of Queensbury Planning Board
Chris Round, Executive Director
Community Development
3-318
"Home of Natural Beauty... A Good Place to Live"
I
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
742 Bay Road, Queensbury, NY. 12804-5902
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS
GREAT ESCAPE THEME PARK LLC
DRAFT DGEIS
Land Use
A map of the Great Escape project area with zoning districts overlay would be
helpful for use by the Planning Board, staff and public during hearings/meetings.
This should be inserted within the DGEIS.
Traffic and Parking
l . Should a queuing analysis be done to consider traffic volumes on the access roads
within the park? The applicant ascertains that festival parking is needed to
accommodate the volumes of traffic expected. How much traffic will the access
roads within the park hold? Stacking numbers should be done considering paved
and unpaved areas in the parking lot. The impact of landscaped island s on
stacking as per the Town of Queensbury code should also be noted. The DGEIS
notes in the Executive Summary that the ring road is "integrally related" to the design
of the parking lot system and entry design, but does not show supporting analysis or
direct connection to the traffic impact study.
2. Pedestrian circulation is not addressed within the parking areas. This is important
considering the proposal for festival parking and emphasis on quick parking and
direction of vehicles by attendants. Parking is proposed to be significantly
increased, also increasing the number of attendees and opportunity for
vehicular/pedestrian conflicts. Concurrent with each vehicle are pedestrians who
will also need direction for safety purposes.
Noise
1. Concerning neighborhood sound levels, Figure 3-7 shows June readings but Table 3-
7 does not for monitoring locations and times. What accounts for the discrepancy?
2. Will there be an increase in the number of evening hours the park is in operation?
The DGEIS notes that evening hours occur 25 days out of 128 +/- days of operation
from May 20 to September 25.. Are evening hours for the month of October
considered since the park is also in operation at this time?
Stormwater and Wastewater Management, and Wetlands
1. Was the Glen Lake Watershed Management Plan (December 1998) consulted for
use in the DGEIS? The Plan study indicates a greater amount of toxic substances at
the sampling site (#5) adjacent to the Great Escape, which is significant as
compared to other sample sites. The greater concentration could be attributed to
more organic soils here and to Route 9 runoff. Continued testing and monitoring to
3-319
I"Home of Natural Beauty... A Good Place to Live"
I
1
1
TOWN OF QUEENSBURY
742 Bay Road, Queensbury, NY. 12804-5902
PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS CONTINUED
GREAT ESCAPE THEME PARK LLC
DRAFT DGEIS
determine causes and impacts was advised in the Plan.
2. Glen Lake Fen is in the project area. This wetland area is a significant habitat area,
containing rare plant species. Changes in water chemistry are to be avoided
according to the biologist who discovered the plants. The DGEIS concludes that
groundwater discharges that reach the wetland would be thoroughly mixed with
large volumes of water from other sources before reaching the rare plant area (p. 3-
6). Is there hydrogeologic analysis to support this statement? What are the sources
and volumes of water that would dilute contaminants?
3. The Glen Lake Watershed Management Plan (page 21) indicates that the Glen Lake
wetland is an important contaminant buffer, preventing toxic and other compounds
from reaching severe contamination levels in the lake. The study does note some
low and low -medium effects on living organisms and biota. The control of future
contamination inputs from Route 9 runoff is therefore a concern. Further
investigation is needed to determine the types and amounts of chemicals that
would negatively impact the rare plant species.
4. Page 4-9 indicates ground water will not be impacted due to no excavation below
groundwater levels. Wastewater disposal is an activity that can impact
groundwater, and its quality. Phosphorous loading information needs to be
quantified, along with information on groundwater and soil conditions to
demonstrate capability of the soils to remove total phosphorous.
3-320
"Home of Natural Beauty... A Good Place to Live"
11/09/2000 16:11 518-761-6411
WC PLANNING&C D
PAGE 01
1
1
1
1
1
1
�wtrr+
WARREN COUNTY W14U iICIPAL CZNTzR
LAMB 020301O 1. NZW yGRK 12948
PLANNING-& COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
TeiOM: f;5181 761-6410
FAX TRANSMMAL
from fax no. 518-761-6411
TO: Chris Round and Marilyn Ryba, Town of Queensbury - 745-4437
Jeff Anthony, Dean Long, and Holly Elmer; The LA Group - 587-018o
John Lemery and Jack Lebowitz, Lemery MacKrell Greisler LLC - 581-882.3
Shelly Johnston, Creighton Manning Engineering, LLP - 446-0397
FROM: Kristin Guild
RE: Warren County Planning Board comments on DGEIS
DATE: November 9, 2000
Number of pages (including cover. sheet) 5
If you have problems receiving this transmission, please contact this office at 518-761-6410.
I have attached the Warren County Planning Board's comments as approved by a unanimous
vote of seven of nine members present at the Board's regular meeting last night, November 8,
2000.
Please feel free to call meat 518-761-6410 with any questions about the statement.
3-321
11/09/2000 16:11 518-761-6411 WC PLANNING&C D PAGE 02
Comments of the Warren County Planning Board on The Gre$t Escape DGEIS
as approved by a unanimous vote of seven of nine members present
at the Board's regular meetint of November 8, 2000
The warren County Planning Board is pleased that the management of The Great Escape has, in
this Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (DGEIS), developed a phased scheme for
infrastructure investments necessary to accommodate the desired increase in annual visitor events
from 900,000 to 1,500,000. The DGEIS represents a step away from individually scrutinized
incremental projects toward a coherent development policy based upon impact thresholds that the
Board believes will better serve the public interest and the applicant alike.
The Board has prepared comments on the DGEIS focusing on potential impact to three types of
County or State resources, both natural and human -built. These key resources are State Route 9
and Interstate 87, Rush Pond and the Glen Lake Fen, and the Warren County Bikeway. The
Board's comments are organized around potential impacts to these resources.
1. State Route 9 smd Interstate 87
State Route 9 and Interstate 87 are the spine of eastern New 'York State and critical transportation
routes for County residents and visitors alike. The Board places a high priority on the smooth
operation of both transportation corridors
Loa Pedestrian Crossing Improvements
The Board has long advocated a pedestrian bridge across State Route 9 between The Great
Escape to the east and its parking areas on the west to reduce the danger of the existing at -grade
crossing and to minimize vehicular traffic congestion caused by pedestrians crossing at grade.
Of the two options presented in the DGEIS, a pedestrian bridge or a tunnel, the Board prefers a
bridge. It is our belief that a highly visible crossing structure willSSist visitors in perceiving the
path from the parking area to the amusement park, reducing the numbers of visitors seeking to
cross at grade.
The other elements essential to the smooth functioning of this separated grade crossing are a
continuous fence of a design that discourages climbing and an easily -understood and frequently.
circulating shuttle system. Given the critical nature of parking area fencing to funnel pedestrians
to the separated -grade crossing, the Board requests that the type and location of the fencing, as
well as the intended time of installation relative to project phases, be clearly articulated in the
FGEIS.
Scott Sopezyk, Director of the Adirondack -Glens Falls Transportation Council, express
concerns with the internal circulation system in his comments dated August 31, 2000. In light of
Mr. Sopczyk's comments and the importance of the shuttle system to efficiently transport visitors
from their vehicles to the separated -grade Grassing, the Board urges the Great Escape
management and its consultants to devote additional thought and attention to internal circulation
within the parking areas.
1 of 4
1 3-322
11/09/2000 16:11 518-761-6411 WC PLANNING&C b PAGE 03
Warren County Planning Board comments on The Great Escape DGEIS
November 8, 2000
1�b Parkin Access Road
The Board believes that creating a parking access road is a good means to the desired end of
reducing the number of ingress/egress points and removing Great Escape traffic from State Route
9, The Board supports creating two signalized, four-way intersections with Route 9, one at
Round Pond Road and the other at Glen Lake Road. We believe that these actions will
dramatically improve the functioning and reduce the danger of these two intersections, which are
currently controlled by stop signs, The Board also believes that shifting vehicular access to and
parking for Martha's to the rear of the building via the access road is an improvement to the
current arrangement.
1_c Interstate 87bierchanees
It is generally accepted that the majority of the additional visitors to The Great Escape will be
coming from the south via Interstate $7, Given this, the impact of the projected increase in
visitors on the Exit 20 interchanges is a matter of concern. The Board supports the transportation
engineering consultant's solution to accommodate greater volumes of northbound Interstate 87
' traffic exiting at Exit 20. While it may be possible to physically extend the ramp south parallel to
the interstate by constructing a retaining wall, the proposed solution to add another lane to the
ramp and to Route 9 south to the proposed parking access road achieves the goal of clearing
exiting vehicles off the interstate.
The Board is concerned with the impact of increased Great Escape traffic to the southbound
entrance and exit ramps via the Gurney Lade overpass. While the southbound entrance ramp has
apparently adequate space for additional vehicular flow at this interchange, there are extremely
limited sight distances for southbound vehicles exiting and turning east toward State Route 9. An
increase in the southbound traffic entering Interstate 87 at this point will exacerbate the existing
potential for conflict. The Board requests that The Great Escape address this issue in the Final
Generic Environmental Impact Statement.
2. Rush Pond and the Glen Lake Fen
The Board recognizes that the project evaluated in the Draft Generic Environmental Impact
Statement will not di —ram`. impact Rush Pond, the Glen Lake Fen, or surrounding wetlands.
However, the park sites proposed for development are within the localized watersheds for these
resources, and effluent from the sewage treatment plant or stormwater runoff from the proposed
parking could potentially have a negative impact.
2_a Sewage Treatment
While the Board understands that there are practical impediments to extending municipal sewer
service to the site within the project timefsame, a sewer connection that would entirely remove
sewage from these sensitive environmental areas for treatment at a municipal plant is the Board's
' preferred method of sewage treatment and disposal. Of the practical alternatives at this time —
numerous scattered site septic systems (current situation) or a consolidated dual sand filter
2 of 4
3-323
11/09/2000 16:11 518-761-6411 WC PLANNING&C D PAGE 04
Warren County Planning Board comments on The Great Escape DGEIS
November 8, 2000
treatment plant (proposed) — the Board certainly prefers the proposed treatment plant as the
method of lesser potential environmental impact.
The Board does request, however, that the Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement clearly
state, as the applicants did in the workshop meeting with members of the Board, that park
management is committed to establishing a sewer connection when Sewer service is extended to
the site, despite this investment in a sewage treatment plant.
Z_b Parking Area Stormwater
The Storrawater Management Report (Appendix 3) indicates that the proposed actions will
slightly reduce the peak runoff from a $0 year storm event, by directing stormwater to a number
of detention basins and drywells. The proposal does appear to meet the minimum standards.
However, the Board believes that the sensitive environmental nature of the park's location
generally and the specific siting of the proposed parking areas between and amongst wetlands
requires a concerted effort to exceed these mimiwnstandards,
The Board believes that this could be achieved in ways not addressed in the DGEIS. Essentially,
the stormwater could be better managed if less of it were generated. Large swaths of
conventionally -paved surface parking generates enormous amounts of polluted stormwater: The
amount of pavement proposed seems excessive for a seasonal use. The Board requests that The
Great Escape's consultants investigate utilizing porous paving materials now available.
The Board is disappointed with the cursory nature of the assessment of a parking structure as an
alternative (page 7-3). Merely stating that a structure is cost prohibitive does not assess its
environmental impacts as a true alternative. While a parking structure to accommodate over
4,000 vehicles may indeed be undesirable for many remous, a mixture of surface lots and a
parking structure is quite possibly a viable alternative that could significantly reduce stormwater
runoff volumes, permit the retention of natural vegetation and unpaved surfaces that could absorb
and filter some of the stormwater that is generated without unappealing swales and catch basins.
The Board requests that the consultants investigate a parking scheme that utilizes porous
materials and reduces the amount of surface parking by incorporating a parking structure.
3. Warren County Bikeway
The Warren County Bikeway is an essential County recreational resource, and the most
spectacular vista enjoyed by residents snd*visitors on the Bikeway is the Glen Lake Fen framed
by a semicircle of hills. On the other side of those hills is the developed amusements and rides
area of the Great Escape. The Board is concerned about the potential visual impact to the
Bikeway caused by structures visible from that area, and requests that visibility from the Biky
be included in impact thresholds triggering additional environmental review. The Board also
requests that Great Escape management locate tall rides in areas of the park where they will not
be visible from the Glen Lake Fen section of the Bikeway.
3
3-324
I11/09/2000 16:11
518-761-6411
WC PLANNING&C D
PAGE 05
I
Warren County Planning Board comments on The Great Escape IDGEIS
November 8, 2000
A few final notes:
- The Board formally endorses the comments of the Adirondack -Glens Falls Transportation
Council regarding the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement.
- Noise from The Great Escape amus etnents and visitors has been the focus of a great deal of
study and comment during this environmental impact review. Excessively loud noise can be
physically damaging to humans and animals; constant or frequently -repeated noise can be
psychologically damaging. Noise c9n have a profound effect on people living near a source, and
can effect the level of enjoyment for visitors.
The Board recognizes that the gn management of The Great Escape has made efforts to mitigate the
noise impacts of the amusement park, and believes that park management, the Town, and this
Board should fairly consider the noise impacts of future amusements in park planning efforts.
The Board requests that The Great Escape continue to collect noise data and to evaluate the
potential noise impacts of proposed new amusements, The Board recommends that any increase
or projected increase in current noise levels from the park should trigger additional
environmental review to assess true alternatives for park development, and requests that the Final
Generic Environmental Impact Statement identify an increase or projected increase in noise from
the park as a threshold for additional environmental review.
- The DGEIS states in Section 4: Potentially Significant Environmental Impacts and Mitigation
Measures that "approximately 11.5 acres of woods and approximately 5 A acres of lawn will be
disturbed by the Project" (page 4-6, point 4.3.1), The mitigation measure for this action is
landscaping to screen the parking areas from State Route 9 and Interstate 87 that will "increase
the diversity of plant species on the site" (page 4-6, point 4.3.2). Increasing species diversity
within a considerably smaller number of plants is hardly mitigation for destroying 11.5 acres of
woodland. The Board requests that The Great Escape's consultants inventory the existing trees
and identify methods to preserve certain trees, particularly at the perimeter of proposed lots.
Further, the Board urges The Great Escape to utilize native species in its landscaping endeavors.
- Finally, the Board requests that the management of The Great Escape remain mindful that the
park is sited in the midst of sensitive environmental area that could be dramatically impacted by
activities within the park. The natural beauty of this area is an asset to The Great Escape, Just as
it is a precious County and State resource. The wetlands, trees and mountains, as much as new
and exciting rides are what differentiate this park from other amusement parks it the region, and
draw visitors back year after year,
4 of 4
3-325